Issue With Cache Hider Need Advice

January 6, 2006

Well there is a reoccuring problem near me. A particular hider has been placing caches on private property and i have been catching the crap for it. It is to the point that i am actually going into these places of business and speeking to the gm prior to searching. Just today i found 3 locations in which the GM did not even know any thing about it and requested that i remove the location from their property.

It is my beleife that this person placing these caches should in fact have their privlage removed...

what do you guys think before i take any action.

January 6, 2006

perhaps repeated SBA logs are in order. Make the reviewers aware of it, and perhaps they will start "scrutinizing" this particualr hider a little more before publishing his/her caches...

1.4k · January 6, 2006

Alot depends on the location and if there are any signs posted. You need to provide more details to give a REAL answer to your question. I have never had any problems searching for a cache other than not finding it.

January 6, 2006

would it be appropriate to contact the reviewers?

January 6, 2006

Grab yourself a badge and be a geo-cop. We've got plenty of them in our area. If you're really good, you may move up to a geo-judge. For now, I'm just a lowly deputy.

Edited January 6, 2006 by Geo-Deputy

January 6, 2006

if the cache is placed on private property, and cachers are in "danger" of being prosecuted for being on said property looking for the cache, then the OP has a valid point. There is a big difference between valid concerns, and "geo-policing".

9.1k · January 6, 2006

These are "parking lot micros" placed near stores to which the public is invited. If parking lot micros make you nervous, don't hunt them. It is pretty easy to tell which ones fit that description, by looking at maps and aerial photos. I have turned away from many many cache hunts if something about the area didn't feel right -- often because a resident was watching me through one of the windows of their nearby house, or a mall security car was parked near the cache.

If I was itching to get that cache, but it bothered me, I would likely write to the owner and ask if they obtained permission. Some do, some don't. Store parking lots are somewhat of a grey area. The public's certainly invited there during business hours to park and shop. Whether that "quasi public property" theory also covers hiding a geocache is a frequent subject for debate here in the forums.

I don't see a reviewer issue here yet. Reviewers assume that a cache owner has read the guidelines when submitting the cache, and this includes an assumption that all "adequate" permission has been obtained. Unless Krispy Kreme has a corporate geocaching policy to validate against, like many state parks do, a reviewer has no idea how much permission, if any, was received for a hide at Krispy Kreme, unless this information is gratuitously volunteered by the cache owner.

So, passing it up and writing to the owner would be my choice, rather than going into the store and talking to whomever was on duty. Or, if I found the cache but thought there was an issue, I would likely mention it in my online log ("store security sure gave me the evil eye on the way out, I sure hope this cache isn't a problem for them"). I didn't see anything in your logs that suggested anything other than a normal fun cache hunt.

January 6, 2006

would it be appropriate to contact the reviewers?

that is an option...but the reviewers are pretty busy. an SBA log brings it to their attention, but don't use them lightly.

If you have proof positive that the cache is on private property, and that cachers are considered trespassing while looking, then it's valid. Otherwise, you have the option of ignoring this user's caches...

Edit: or you can take the advice of a reviewer, who prolly knows what he's talking about.....

Edited January 6, 2006 by 4leafclover

6.5k · January 6, 2006

Not sure what flavor of crap you are catching since your recent find logs are all pretty benign. Perhaps you should slow down and not go rushing after this hiders caches for a few days or a week, and see what kind of trouble the other finders are reporting in their logs first? If the coast seems clear-go find them, if they are encountering trouble, stay away if you are bothered by that sort of thing.

It does not appear to be a reviewer kind of issue from what I can read here. It may seem different up close.

January 6, 2006

I agree 4-leaf. If there's danger to a cacher getting into trouble, it should be brought to the attention of someone. But from looking at the recent logs, these appear to be parking lot micros.

I had a micro in a parking lot and the cops were called on a cacher and I archived it. The parking area is for a store my best friend is the manager of and he begged me to put one there to possible bring his store some business. Why were the cops called? One of his cashiers thought a cacher was stealing a parking sign. We still laugh about it to this day.

January 6, 2006

with regards to this area of town, you can be cited for eating your take out mcdonalds in the mcdonalds parking lot. Or sitting out infront of the kmart talking to your friends. I have received 5 trespassing violations totally nearly $350 in the last 4 years for being with in the boundries of their parking lot.

1.3k · January 6, 2006

with regards to this area of town, you can be cited for eating your take out mcdonalds in the mcdonalds parking lot. Or sitting out infront of the kmart talking to your friends. I have received 5 trespassing violations totally nearly $350 in the last 4 years for being with in the boundries of their parking lot.

Huh? I'm glad I don't live there.

Edited January 6, 2006 by Trinity's Crew

January 6, 2006

with regards to 3 caches i have in mind, 1 is located in between a store sign and the mounting surface and the other 2 require removing stones from the retaining wall. All 3 of these caches i was approched by managment and with the exception of 1 of them i was able to get permission from the General Manager to keep the cache, but one they asked me to remove it. As a new member i am not intending to make any waves im just trying to figure out what the right course of action is...

2.5k · January 6, 2006

with regards to this area of town, you can be cited for eating your take out mcdonalds in the mcdonalds parking lot. Or sitting out infront of the kmart talking to your friends. I have received 5 trespassing violations totally nearly $350 in the last 4 years for being with in the boundries of their parking lot.

I'm sure it's just a learning curve, you're only 1 month new to the game. If they don't feel right, don't feel you have to break any laws. On a side note, I've got to admit I'm a bit envious of your state total on your profile, you have more states in 1 month than I have in almost 4 years! Good work.

5.3k · January 6, 2006

with regards to this area of town, you can be cited for eating your take out mcdonalds in the mcdonalds parking lot. Or sitting out infront of the kmart talking to your friends. I have received 5 trespassing violations totally nearly $350 in the last 4 years for being with in the boundries of their parking lot.

IS it the city tha issue the tick, or does the store call the police. If the store call the police, I would contact the parent company. If it is the city inforcing some ordinance, I would move to a city that is less of a police state.

January 6, 2006

with regards to this area of town, you can be cited for eating your take out mcdonalds in the mcdonalds parking lot. Or sitting out infront of the kmart talking to your friends. I have received 5 trespassing violations totally nearly $350 in the last 4 years for being with in the boundries of their parking lot.

I'm sure it's just a learning curve, you're only 1 month new to the game. If they don't feel right, don't feel you have to break any laws. On a side note, I've got to admit I'm a bit envious of your state total on your profile, you have more states in 1 month than I have in almost 4 years! Good work.

errr no...

hahaha thats my where i have been state thingie... i am going to change it to where i have cached

January 6, 2006

with regards to this area of town, you can be cited for eating your take out mcdonalds in the mcdonalds parking lot. Or sitting out infront of the kmart talking to your friends. I have received 5 trespassing violations totally nearly $350 in the last 4 years for being with in the boundries of their parking lot.

IS it the city tha issue the tick, or does the store call the police. If the store call the police, I would contact the parent company. If it is the city inforcing some ordinance, I would move to a city that is less of a police state.

its the city's... Denver, Lakewood, Westminster, Littleton, Golden... these are areas in which place no tresspassing signs on their parking lots. it is very common in the metro area. tickets range from $25 to $200

January 6, 2006

1 violation, oh well. 2 violations, get the point. 3 violations is not bad luck. 5 violations, STAY AWAY. You cant cache someplace else in Colorado except for a parking lot?!?!

24.7k · January 6, 2006

In general any location of public accomodation is a valid place to consider placing a geocache.

If by chance a land owner chews your butt by all means pull the cache and let the owner know what happened. So far in just under 1000 caches I've had that happen once and I took care of the problem. By the time I was done they were willing to consider going geocaching themselves.

However if you go talk to the General Manager that person may or may not have been the person who said yes to the cache being there. They may or may not have the authority to say yes to the cache being there and if you use the wrong spin they will almost always say "NO" Some people have that gift.

In short, you had a problem once, and created a problem the other times. I am aware of the types of laws that you are talking about for parking areas.

24.7k · January 6, 2006

with regards to 3 caches i have in mind, 1 is located in between a store sign and the mounting surface and the other 2 require removing stones from the retaining wall. All 3 of these caches i was approched by managment and with the exception of 1 of them i was able to get permission from the General Manager to keep the cache, but one they asked me to remove it. As a new member i am not intending to make any waves im just trying to figure out what the right course of action is...

I should of read this first.

Retaining wall caches (and rock wall caches where they have them) are a bad idea. People can not find the cache without causing harm to the wall and that's even if you are being careful. It is a quick way to get the land manager to be agasint geocaching in general. I have seen too many retaining walls that used to look nice look like an accordian after geocaching to where I hate these hides.

This is one case where I have always emailed the cache owner to point out what will happen. In your shoes I'd do the same, point them at this post and if they don't fix it, I'd talk to your local approver.

38.2k · January 6, 2006

with regards to this area of town, you can be cited for eating your take out mcdonalds in the mcdonalds parking lot. Or sitting out infront of the kmart talking to your friends. I have received 5 trespassing violations totally nearly $350 in the last 4 years for being with in the boundries of their parking lot.

IS it the city tha issue the tick, or does the store call the police. If the store call the police, I would contact the parent company. If it is the city inforcing some ordinance, I would move to a city that is less of a police state.

its the city's... Denver, Lakewood, Westminster, Littleton, Golden... these are areas in which place no tresspassing signs on their parking lots. it is very common in the metro area. tickets range from $25 to $200

Whadda doing wandering parking lots when you have Tahosa caches to hunt! Man, if I lived in Tahosa country the last place I'd be looking for caches is the Wal Mart lot!

7.3k · January 6, 2006

argh..."removing stones from the retaining wall"

I have a hide near a retaining wall. Knowing what could happen I added this to the write up, "I couldn't think of a hint that wasn't a total spoiler, so I'll tell you where it's not: the retaining wall - leave those stones alone; also this is not a scrub hunt."

5.7k · January 6, 2006

These are "parking lot micros" placed near stores to which the public is invited. If parking lot micros make you nervous, don't hunt them. It is pretty easy to tell which ones fit that description, by looking at maps and aerial photos. I have turned away from many many cache hunts if something about the area didn't feel right -- often because a resident was watching me through one of the windows of their nearby house, or a mall security car was parked near the cache.

If I was itching to get that cache, but it bothered me, I would likely write to the owner and ask if they obtained permission. Some do, some don't. Store parking lots are somewhat of a grey area. The public's certainly invited there during business hours to park and shop. Whether that "quasi public property" theory also covers hiding a geocache is a frequent subject for debate here in the forums.

I don't see a reviewer issue here yet. Reviewers assume that a cache owner has read the guidelines when submitting the cache, and this includes an assumption that all "adequate" permission has been obtained. Unless Krispy Kreme has a corporate geocaching policy to validate against, like many state parks do, a reviewer has no idea how much permission, if any, was received for a hide at Krispy Kreme, unless this information is gratuitously volunteered by the cache owner.

So, passing it up and writing to the owner would be my choice, rather than going into the store and talking to whomever was on duty. Or, if I found the cache but thought there was an issue, I would likely mention it in my online log ("store security sure gave me the evil eye on the way out, I sure hope this cache isn't a problem for them"). I didn't see anything in your logs that suggested anything other than a normal fun cache hunt.

And if the owner replied: "Yes", you'd take what action(s)?

And if the owner replied: "No", you'd take what action(s)?

January 6, 2006

Whadda doing wandering parking lots when you have Tahosa caches to hunt! Man, if I lived in Tahosa country the last place I'd be looking for caches is the Wal Mart lot!

lol well those are the days when i had nother better to do then drink a brew in a parking lot talking to other car freaks... as for Tahosa... i have hunted some of his but most of his caches are 1.5 hours from me... so i dont get the chance to do those. How ever i am in the process of making some very annoying micros... most of the "wilderness" caches i have found were just blaintly obvious so i am making ones that are not ammo cans hidden in pine needles. The first one i hid was cammoed and placed in a crack in a very steep rock formation just 150 feet from the road.

I know people hate micros but so long as there is a good place to hide them i will place them.

1.8k · January 6, 2006

If parking lot micros make you nervous, don't hunt them.

Really, I don't know how much simpler of a solution you can get. Since it seems to be caches hidden by a particular person, it really can't be that hard to just ignore his/her hides, can it?

I know there are people whose caches I can't stand, so I just skip 'em and move on to one I'll likely enjoy more. I'm not going to run out of caches to find anytime soon, so there's never a need for me to find a cache that I'm not comfortable finding.

January 6, 2006

with regards to this area of town, you can be cited for eating your take out mcdonalds in the mcdonalds parking lot. Or sitting out infront of the kmart talking to your friends. I have received 5 trespassing violations totally nearly $350 in the last 4 years for being with in the boundries of their parking lot.

Wow, it's hard to decide which message to quote. You received 5 trespassing violations in the past 4 years! I would have learned a lesson the 2nd or 3rd time. Now that geocaches are showing up in the area, it appears you have appointed yourself the local cache master who has to get involved in every cache placement in the area.

In my opinion, if you see a cache in a questionable area, you should make no attempt to find it, but you should certainly send a message to the owner expressing your concern, and let them resolve the issue.

It sounds to me like you should get another hobby like monitoring CB radio and reporting people who use profanity to the FCC. I suggest that if you continue your quest, you will soon gain a reputation among local cachers as a meddling buffoon, or at least someone who should find another outlet for their control issues.

2.7k · January 6, 2006

Some advice from this old Chef. If you don't like the soup don't stir the pot.

Go find another entree and enjoy your meal in peace. If it gives you heartburn then go on a bland diet.

January 6, 2006

So to take the other side, no one should do anything about a guy who is blatantly breaking the rules?

I see no logic in this. I think what the kid is doing (attempting to do) is the right thing for the hobby. If the guy is planting caches without permission on private land, he is being a poor cacher.

Don't let the others get you down kid. You got more heart than most.

2.7k · January 6, 2006

lol well those are the days when i had nother better to do then drink a brew in a parking lot talking to other car freaks...

On seeing your earlier post about trespassing tickets, my thought was "what part of Red China does this guy live in?" and "Man the cops in that town sure could use a few more donut shoppes". But seeing this post, I suspect the "trespassing" charges have a little more basis than just eating a Big Mac® in the parking lot.

As with many things (most) in life, there is probably more going on than meets the eye. If the cops are issuing a lot of tickets, there is probably a bigger problem that they are trying to control.

I doubt the caching thing puts much fuel on the fire. But it might be a bad place to cache for whatever other reasons are leading the cops to look so closely at their citizenry.

The cacher(s) who placed the caches probably did NOT get permission. So what. Neither did the truckers who parked in the lot for a short nap. Or the friends who got together to share one car for a short time and left the other car in the lot to conserve our country's oil reserves. Or the group of teens who met there to exchange "war stories" and drink Coca-Cola®.

Micros in a parking lot usually are very innocuous. Permission is not really necessary in most cases, but if the cache causes problems or the property owner expresses concern, then you are right to post SBA.

Otherwise, don't go looking for trouble.

2.3k · January 6, 2006

Whadda doing wandering parking lots when you have Tahosa caches to hunt! Man, if I lived in Tahosa country the last place I'd be looking for caches is the Wal Mart lot!

lol well those are the days when i had nother better to do then drink a brew in a parking lot talking to other car freaks... as for Tahosa... i have hunted some of his but most of his caches are 1.5 hours from me... so i dont get the chance to do those. How ever i am in the process of making some very annoying micros... most of the "wilderness" caches i have found were just blaintly obvious so i am making ones that are not ammo cans hidden in pine needles. The first one i hid was cammoed and placed in a crack in a very steep rock formation just 150 feet from the road.

I know people hate micros but so long as there is a good place to hide them i will place them.

Well I promise to pay close attention to your hides so no one gets tickets.

January 6, 2006

not sure what co admin ment by that one... this all started as a need advice on an issue which i saw as a possible problem... at no time was i saying that a certain action was or should be taken. As a new member of this very entertaining hobby i dont know everything and i can safely assume that i will never know everything. But thankyou all for your input.

January 6, 2006

with regards to this area of town, you can be cited for eating your take out mcdonalds in the mcdonalds parking lot. Or sitting out infront of the kmart talking to your friends. I have received 5 trespassing violations totally nearly $350 in the last 4 years for being with in the boundries of their parking lot.

If you really got 5 trespassing violations totally (sic) nearly $350 in the last 4 years;

you must not be very bright.

Maybe you should try another sport, skydiving maybe?

January 6, 2006

WOW, I sit and read lot of posts about lots of topics. Most I dont reply because I just find the questions interesting and I can file them in my mind if that situation ever comes up for me. And when it is a touchy subject who wants to get involved in sometimes aggressive posting.

I dont have a opinion on the question the original poster made, I am to new to know the answer.

BUT.(with a pounding heading my way I am sure) I have to say............

I have read dozens and dozens of posts about why people lurk, why people hate forums, is this a mean group, is this a harsh board. and for the most part I have seen this is a amazing sport with more then the usual amount of decent and friendly people.

that being said. I have seen more bashing type stuff in this thread alone then I have read over the last few weeks.

Did anyone notice that this NEWBIE, asked for input and advice? not a dissection of his character?

If you read the very first post in this thread, he basically JUST asked how to handle things like this. he stated that he has been approached by management at these caches, and asked BEFORE he did anything he wanted input. he didnt even bash the person he has a problem with by pointing out specifically who it was.

Does it really matter how many times the person asking the question has gone to the cachers caches?

Does it matter what type they are?

I thought the question was a how do you handle if you get told to leave or to remove caches over and over again?

(some people gave very sound and informative advice)

but a lot of the posts are instead of factual, informative advice, negative and lightly bashing his character. such as:

"you must not be very bright."( I know this was based on a later post of his)

"If you don't like the soup don't stir the pot."

"Go find another entree and enjoy your meal in peace. If it gives you heartburn then go on a bland diet."

"It sounds to me like you should get another hobby like monitoring CB radio and reporting people who use profanity to the FCC."

"Not sure what flavor of crap you are catching since your recent find logs are all pretty benign."

How sad:( people like me and all the new people, who have no real knowledge of whats considered right or wrong, how to handle situations can now worry that their character and question can have the possibility of bringing a negative response.

I wish the people who I have had the privilege of having them answer my sometimes stupid and offtrack questions with kindness and dignity would of posted.

Flowerswife

Edited January 6, 2006 by flowerswife

January 6, 2006

Well if you want a kind respoce I'll give it a shot.

If you think the cache will get people in trouble contact the owner and see what he says.

If the owners responce still makes you think the cache is agenst the rules of GC then contact a reviewer

If the reviewers responce dosent sit right with you then dont hunt this persons caches.

Thats all you can do. This is a game (plz dont flame on that statment) play it how you feal safe.

Dave

2.2k · January 6, 2006

From the Forum Guidelines:

Some things to keep in mind when posting:

Respect: Respect the guidelines for forum usage, and site usage. Respect Groundspeak, its employees, volunteers, yourself, fellow community members, and guests on these boards. Whether a community member has one post or 5,000 posts, they deserve the same respect.

Foul Language and obscene images will not be tolerated. This site is family friendly, and all posts and posters must respect the integrity of the site.

Personal Attacks and Flames will not be tolerated. If you want to praise or criticize, give examples as to why it is good or bad, general attacks on a person or idea will not be tolerated.

Everyone is entitled to offer input, just try not to be so witty, mmm-kay?

January 6, 2006

What do other peoples logs say that have hunted these caches? Did they have a problem also? I'm not flaming but are you trying not to be obvious when hunting these urban micro's? :rolleyes:

1.3k · January 6, 2006

It is to the point that i am actually going into these places of business and speeking to the gm prior to searching. Just today i found 3 locations in which the GM did not even know any thing about it and requested that i remove the location from their property.

I think this is the part that has most people concerned. If you walked into any retail establishment and asked a manager if they were aware of a game being played on their property, the knee-jerk response will be overwhelmingly negative. They will not understand it and will err on the side of caution and ask that the game piece be removed.

Some will say that permission should have been obtained prior to placing the cache, but the overwhelming majority of geocaches have no EXPLICIT permission to be placed where they are, nor is it normally required.

If you are uncomfortable seeking these caches you shouldn't needlessly alarm the store manager, you should skip them entirely and email the owner with your concerns.

As for some of the caches being hidden in retaining walls, I can't comment on that because I didn't see the placement of the cache.

January 6, 2006

One thing to consider is that in many of these fast food joints parking lots they have video cameras monitoring the whole place. As stealthful as you may think you are Big Brother's eyes can see you prowling about.

It is the mgt option to be sticklers about the use of the private parking lot. It is for the patrons of the store during normal business hours and many are posted as such.

January 6, 2006

well those are the days when i had nother better to do then drink a brew in a parking lot talking to other car freaks...

Flowerswife, I am not oblivious to your post, but based on this statement alone, I have to question the ability of the OP to make a sound determination of what proper use of the parking lot would be. Hanging out, drinking beer in the parking lot? No wonder he was cited five times.

10.2k · January 6, 2006

I don't see a reviewer issue here yet. Reviewers assume that a cache owner has read the guidelines when submitting the cache, and this includes an assumption that all "adequate" permission has been obtained. Unless Krispy Kreme has a corporate geocaching policy to validate against, like many state parks do, a reviewer has no idea how much permission, if any, was received for a hide at Krispy Kreme, unless this information is gratuitously volunteered by the cache owner.

I have to disagree with a reviewer's assumption the placer has read the guidelines regarding permission, and has complied. (despite the box every cache placer checks; I suppose they've all read computer software agreements too :rolleyes: ). There are 33 lamo private property parking lot micros in my area. Easy to look up, as they're all on my ignore list (so no "don't like them, don't look for them" comments, please ). You know how many of these placers mention them being placed with permission in the body of the cache description? ONE!! I think it's plenty safe to assume, in the case of private property parking lot micros, that if permission isn't "volunteered", it wasn't obtained.

Edited January 6, 2006 by TheWhiteUrkel

3.3k · January 6, 2006

Some will say that permission should have been obtained prior to placing the cache, but the overwhelming majority of geocaches have no EXPLICIT permission to be placed where they are, nor is it normally required.

If you are uncomfortable seeking these caches you shouldn't needlessly alarm the store manager, you should skip them entirely and email the owner with your concerns.

The problem with this logic is that the vast majority of cache placers, who hide caches on private property, in full view of store or restaurant patrons, don't get permission for their hides. Responsible owners, who have received permission to place caches, almost always note this in the cache description.

When concerned cacher finders email these owners, they get rude replies and the typical. "If you don't like this type of cache, don't look for them!"

Bookmarks can be used to express your displeasure. Cache at your own risk!

Edited January 6, 2006 by Kit Fox

9.4k · January 6, 2006

I don't see a reviewer issue here yet. Reviewers assume that a cache owner has read the guidelines when submitting the cache, and this includes an assumption that all "adequate" permission has been obtained. Unless Krispy Kreme has a corporate geocaching policy to validate against, like many state parks do, a reviewer has no idea how much permission, if any, was received for a hide at Krispy Kreme, unless this information is gratuitously volunteered by the cache owner.

I have to disagree with a reviewer's assumption the placer has read the guidelines regarding permission, and has complied. (despite the box every cache placer checks; I suppose they've all read computer software agreements too ). There are 33 lamo private property parking lot micros in my area. Easy to look up, as they're all on my ignore list (so no "don't like them, don't look for them" comments, please ). You know how many of these placers mention them being placed with permission in the body of the cache description? ONE!! I think it's plenty safe to assume, in the case of private property parking lot micros, that if permission isn't "volunteered", it wasn't obtained.

You mean you don't read EULA's on software?

Does that mean if you made copies for all your friends you would be "innocent" if the software company found out about it? No, the responsibility is yours. You checked the box saying you read it, if you really didn't read it it's no one's fault but your own.

9.1k · January 6, 2006

I don't see a reviewer issue here yet. Reviewers assume that a cache owner has read the guidelines when submitting the cache, and this includes an assumption that all "adequate" permission has been obtained. Unless Krispy Kreme has a corporate geocaching policy to validate against, like many state parks do, a reviewer has no idea how much permission, if any, was received for a hide at Krispy Kreme, unless this information is gratuitously volunteered by the cache owner.

I have to disagree with a reviewer's assumption the placer has read the guidelines regarding permission, and has complied. (despite the box every cache placer checks; I suppose they've all read computer software agreements too ). There are 33 lamo private property parking lot micros in my area. Easy to look up, as they're all on my ignore list (so no "don't like them, don't look for them" comments, please ). You know how many of these placers mention them being placed with permission in the body of the cache description? ONE!! I think it's plenty safe to assume, in the case of private property parking lot micros, that if permission isn't "volunteered", it wasn't obtained.

Sometimes the permission statement is made in a reviewer note that's deleted prior to publication. And that goes for caches in parking lots as well as in parks. Unless the land manager has a policy whose terms require that permission details be stated right on the cache page, it is not the reviewer's job to insist on this, nor the owner's obligation to state what permission has been obtained. The owner's only obligation is to follow what the listing guidelines say.

You may disagree with the reviewers' assumptions about guidelines compliance, but that is the way it works.

9.1k · January 6, 2006

These are "parking lot micros" placed near stores to which the public is invited. If parking lot micros make you nervous, don't hunt them. It is pretty easy to tell which ones fit that description, by looking at maps and aerial photos. I have turned away from many many cache hunts if something about the area didn't feel right -- often because a resident was watching me through one of the windows of their nearby house, or a mall security car was parked near the cache.

If I was itching to get that cache, but it bothered me, I would likely write to the owner and ask if they obtained permission. Some do, some don't. Store parking lots are somewhat of a grey area. The public's certainly invited there during business hours to park and shop. Whether that "quasi public property" theory also covers hiding a geocache is a frequent subject for debate here in the forums.

I don't see a reviewer issue here yet. Reviewers assume that a cache owner has read the guidelines when submitting the cache, and this includes an assumption that all "adequate" permission has been obtained. Unless Krispy Kreme has a corporate geocaching policy to validate against, like many state parks do, a reviewer has no idea how much permission, if any, was received for a hide at Krispy Kreme, unless this information is gratuitously volunteered by the cache owner.

So, passing it up and writing to the owner would be my choice, rather than going into the store and talking to whomever was on duty. Or, if I found the cache but thought there was an issue, I would likely mention it in my online log ("store security sure gave me the evil eye on the way out, I sure hope this cache isn't a problem for them"). I didn't see anything in your logs that suggested anything other than a normal fun cache hunt.

And if the owner replied: "Yes", you'd take what action(s)?

And if the owner replied: "No", you'd take what action(s)?

If the owner replied "yes," then I would eagerly seek out the cache again, knowing I wouldn't get in trouble if law enforcement, the property owner, etc., were to come by and ask what I was doing. I would just be careful of muggles, like I always am.

If the owner replied "no," and I felt the cache was problematic, I'd likely take action to have a reviewer archive the cache. I haven't had that situation arise, so I am speaking hypothetically, and it's more likely that the owner would either not reply at all, or reply with a rant about minding my own business, etc. But in *actual* experience, I've logged a few SBA's when there were private property issues, and those caches were archived.

January 6, 2006

with regards to this area of town, you can be cited for eating your take out mcdonalds in the mcdonalds parking lot. Or sitting out infront of the kmart talking to your friends. I have received 5 trespassing violations totally nearly $350 in the last 4 years for being with in the boundries of their parking lot.

What?!?!?! What part of Nazi Germany is this??? Are you trying to say you can't eat take out food in the parking lot???

You are talking about sitting in your car, right? And not just laying down in the drive through lane???

:rolleyes:

6.5k · January 6, 2006

lol well those are the days when i had nother better to do then drink a brew in a parking lot talking to other car freaks

Maybe the problems stem from substituting a McSoreley's for the McFlurry in his happy meals?

Oh and flowerswife-this really is a kinder gentler forum than many out there.

These moderators do not tolerate crap of any flavor. (The OP's word not mine)

You should be careful when taking quotes out of context (as I just did above :rolleyes: )

Edited January 6, 2006 by wimseyguy

3.2k · January 6, 2006

with regards to 3 caches i have in mind, 1 is located in between a store sign and the mounting surface and the other 2 require removing stones from the retaining wall. All 3 of these caches i was approched by managment and with the exception of 1 of them i was able to get permission from the General Manager to keep the cache, but one they asked me to remove it. As a new member i am not intending to make any waves im just trying to figure out what the right course of action is...

I certainly wouldn't place a cache where you had to remove stones from the retaining wall! I'd tend to avoid this person's caches but maybe put a watch on them to see what other folk's logs say. If others don't have issues with the management it's possible that you need to work on your stealth or that the particular establishements in question are ones with which you have a history - per the tickets you mentioned. I really don't have the info to know about that so I'll refrain from making any type of judgement. If you have had the manager request that you remove the caches You might consider placing a note on the cache page to that effect. It would not only notify the hider but also let other cachers know of a potential problem. Again, I don't really know enough about the situation to tell if that is appropriate or not.

I'm surprised by some of the "personal attack" types of replies in this thread. I don't usually see that sort of thing very often. I can certainly understand coming to the forums to ask your question since this is the appropriate place to find folks who should be able to give you valid input.

Best of luck and remember: Caching is a FUN thing to do. If somebody's caches aren't fun for you then move along to caches that ARE fun for you.

Edited January 6, 2006 by Thrak

10.2k · January 6, 2006

So to take the other side, no one should do anything about a guy who is blatantly breaking the rules?

I see no logic in this. I think what the kid is doing (attempting to do) is the right thing for the hobby. If the guy is planting caches without permission on private land, he is being a poor cacher.

Don't let the others get you down kid. You got more heart than most.

I too would like to express my support for the thread starter, and their original point (although they themselves seem to have taken the ball and run with it on the "citations for loitering in parking lot" sub-thread :rolleyes: ). It's safe to assume 99% of lamo parking lot micros are placed without permission, and 99% of business owners would be non-suportive of a "game" being played on their property, and want the game piece removed if informed about it. But being a geo-cop, and going to the business owner will only cause you aggravation (and get you flamed in the forums). The vast majority of geocachers will find anything anyone places anywhere, so it's best to just ignore these type of cache placements, if you don't like them. Ignore lists are a pretty recent website feature, but they work quite well

10.2k · January 6, 2006

Sometimes the permission statement is made in a reviewer note that's deleted prior to publication. And that goes for caches in parking lots as well as in parks. Unless the land manager has a policy whose terms require that permission details be stated right on the cache page, it is not the reviewer's job to insist on this, nor the owner's obligation to state what permission has been obtained. The owner's only obligation is to follow what the listing guidelines say.

You may disagree with the reviewers' assumptions about guidelines compliance, but that is the way it works.

That is a good point that permission could be noted in a reviewer note, but telling the reviewer about permission, and not the geocacher out in the field, who is most likely to incur the wrath of business owners, security guards, police officers, etc.. makes no sense to me. I stand by my statement that if permission isn't noted in the cache description, you can assume in almost all cases it wasn't obtained.

3.9k · January 6, 2006

Sometimes the permission statement is made in a reviewer note that's deleted prior to publication. And that goes for caches in parking lots as well as in parks. Unless the land manager has a policy whose terms require that permission details be stated right on the cache page, it is not the reviewer's job to insist on this, nor the owner's obligation to state what permission has been obtained. The owner's only obligation is to follow what the listing guidelines say.

You may disagree with the reviewers' assumptions about guidelines compliance, but that is the way it works.

That is a good point that permission could be noted in a reviewer note, but telling the reviewer about permission, and not the geocacher out in the field, who is most likely to incur the wrath of business owners, security guards, police officers, etc.. makes no sense to me. I stand by my statement that if permission isn't noted in the cache description, you can assume in almost all cases it wasn't obtained.

If permission is needed to seek the cache, or needed it should be in the description. Typically, documentation of permission is not needed in the field by the seeker. If it is, then it should be in the cache container (who gave permission and when).

Issue With Cache Hider Need Advice

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment