Caches that make you nervous...........

[+4 Walls]

Unfortunately with the saturation of caches more and more are showing up on private property. Originally I searched for these caches and logged several but as time goes on I am either developing a conscious or am getting smarter since I no longer will search for traditional and multi type caches on public property. I am ok with virtuals and traditional/multis that have owner permission.

 

Unfortunately, few if any caches have permission for private property. At times I have found caches that definitely violate the guidelines for cache placement. I can list a few located here in the Denver Metro area.

 

If this trend continues, more and more communities will be taking action limiting placement of caches or making them illegal in areas. Private citizens as well as authorities will be pressing charges for not only trespassing but for destruction of property.

 

I feel the only solutions for this problem is are first do not seek out traditional, multicaches that are on private property and do not appear to have permission. Second, if you become aware of one notify the administrators for your area to deactivate the listing. Thirdly, let the "owner" of the cache know its on private property.

 

So what do you think? Do you get nervous about caches on private property? What do you do? What can we do?

 

Dan

[+4 Walls]

Continuing from my original post.

 

I have also seen multis where the clues for the various stages involve defacing public property such as writing in marker on signs and benches the next set of coordinates. This being done on private public property! It is just as bad as not getting permission for private property!

 

Dan

[+unicyclist]

There was one about 1 mile away from my house that was def tresspassing. I emailed the owner about two or three times with no response. I know alot of drug dealing and using goes in in this wooded area.

 

I used to ride bikes around in this dryed up lake, I never got caught, but I know many people that got tresspassing tickets.

 

I finally got fed up with no mention of "no tresspassing" of it in the description. I waypointed all the signs and emailed the owner with lat/lon and pictures for all 5 signs. Still no response.

So I sent a email to the local reviewer and it was archived.

Edited October 5, 2006 by unicyclist

[+Snoogans]

So what do you think?

 

I think, given some of your statements, that this will be an entertaining thread this weekend. OOoo. I hope it rains across most of the country.

[+4 Walls]

So what do you think?

 

I think, given some of your statements, that this will be an entertaining thread this weekend. OOoo. I hope it rains across most of the country.

 

Entertaining or not its a major problem!

 

Dan

[Clan Riffster]

One Adam Twelve, One Adam Twelve, See the man from Jefferson County Colorado in reference to people trespassing on other people's property.

Snoog, can you pass the salt & butter?

[+StarBrand]

I'll just help kick off some of the entertainment here with a simple question:

 

How do you KNOW that no permission was obtained?

[+4 Walls]

I'll just help kick off some of the entertainment here with a simple question:

 

How do you KNOW that no permission was obtained?

 

Exactly! I don't know that permission was obtained. If there is not statement on the listing that it was then I have no reason to believe it was. If permission was obtained then the "owner" of the cache should have no qualms about stating so.

 

I really doubt though that permission was given to place a magnetic keyholder under the base shroud of a light pole in a Lowe's parking lot. (GCQD8P) (Yes, I did find it but just because I did in the past does not make it right.) I really don't think the owner of shopping center wants folks moving the cover and potentially exposing the wires and getting electrocuted.

 

Some common-sense must apply and placing this cache here does not show any.

 

Dan

[+briansnat]

Unfortunately, few if any caches have permission for private property. At times I have found caches that definitely violate the guidelines for cache placement. I can list a few located here in the Denver Metro area.

 

I have also seen multis where the clues for the various stages involve defacing public property such as writing in marker on signs and benches the next set of coordinates. This being done on private public property!

 

These are hidden in violaiton of the guidelines and I agree that they are bad for our sport. My question to you is, what did you do about it when you encountered these caches? Did you log them and go merrily on your way, or did you log an SBA or report the caches to the local reviewer?

Edited October 5, 2006 by briansnat

[+BlueDeuce]

My common sense tells me to contact the reviewer and tell them of my concerns. They will either clarify the situation for me or gather some data.

 

The "more and more communities" thing is probably a little over the top considering that it's easily taken care of. Either the cache is within guidlines or it's not.

 

edit: or what briansnat said.

Edited October 5, 2006 by BlueDeuce

[+4 Walls]

Unfortunately, few if any caches have permission for private property. At times I have found caches that definitely violate the guidelines for cache placement. I can list a few located here in the Denver Metro area.

 

I have also seen multis where the clues for the various stages involve defacing public property such as writing in marker on signs and benches the next set of coordinates. This being done on private public property!

 

These are hidden in violaiton of the guidelines and I agree that they are bad for our sport. My question to you is, what did you do about it when you encountered these caches? Did you log them and go merrily on your way, or did you log an SBA or report the caches to the local reviewer?

 

From my original post

Originally I searched for these caches and logged several but as time goes on I am either developing a conscious or am getting smarter since I no longer will search for traditional and multi type caches on public property

 

So yes I did merrily go on my way, but that was in the past. I am not saying it was right, it wasn't. I have started notifying the local reviewer about these caches that are still active that I am aware of.

 

I have become increasingly uneasy about many caches and in the spirit of being forthright and helping preserve our sport of Geocaching taking action now and changing my ways.

 

Dan

[+DustyKat]

I think one should assume that Colorado Admin knows the rules and only approves accordingly. I am aware of different caches that he has followed up on and forced the hider to do the right thing or it becomes archived. I know the parks and rec departments in the various communities have different rules for caching and where I am from they are not allowed. I also know that Colorado Admin approves or disapproves within the rules of each community. With your extreme concern why don't you become a volunteer for approving? It appears we could over-concern ourselves right out of a good sport. Let Colorado Admin do his job!

[+4 Walls]

I think one should assume that Colorado Admin knows the rules and only approves accordingly. I am aware of different caches that he has followed up on and forced the hider to do the right thing or it becomes archived. I know the parks and rec departments in the various communities have different rules for caching and where I am from they are not allowed. I also know that Colorado Admin approves or disapproves within the rules of each community. With your extreme concern why don't you become a volunteer for approving? It appears we could over-concern ourselves right out of a good sport. Let Colorado Admin do his job!

 

I think the Colorado Admin is doing his job, I know he did not approve a cache of mine until I could give him the information concerning permission. (I screwed up by not getting permission before submitting). Of the hundreds of caches submitted every year he must trust cachers to give him accurate information and to let him know of caches that are against the guidelines.

 

If I had the time to contribute to being an administrator I would. but I have commitments as a moderator on another website that takes up too much time to be fair to approving geocaches in a timely manner.

 

As for "over-concerning" our selves out of a good sport, the greater danger is 'under'concerning' ourselves out of a good sport.

 

Dan

[AZcachemeister]

There are gray areas involved here.

The approvers know the rules, but they can't possibly visit every cache to check-up on what they were told by the hiders.

We, the responsible finders, must report what we feel are questionable hides to the reviewers.

As I said before, there are gray areas involved.

What is acceptable to me, you may not agree with.

What one reviewer permits, another may archive for.

What gets not a second glance in one state/county/city/town, might get someone jailed in another.

 

If it's an area where people are not generally expected to be, then yes, permission is needed and I (as a finder) need to know the name of the person providing permission, so I can get my donkey out of hot water if I am challenged at the site.

As lame as they are (and it wouldn't hurt my feelings if they all went away), I have no qualms about a lamppost hide in the front parking lot of a shopping center, where people are generally invited to be hanging around.

You may not agree, and if so, PLEASE let your reviewer(s) know!

If you don't like the hide, you are always free to pass it up.

 

Yes, I have spoken up, and some caches have been archived as a result.

[+biosearch]

I'm new to this. I've read the rules and regulations. I think I understand them. The reviewer makes sure that these rules are followed. It may be that he/she can not see each cache that he/she reviews, but the locations and the explanations given by the cache owners should be suitable to make his/her decision. If they have questions they should be asked.

 

I also feel that the cache is the responsibility of the cache owner and the finding of the cache is the responsibility of the cacher. If you don't feel it is proper you can make that decision for yourself and stop short. If you want If you want to make a comment, make a comment. The lines blur at points and you may make a decision one direction and others make a decision a different way.

 

If we confine ourselves to geocaching on private property for which permission has been given, there will be enough caches that one could find them all within a month. Perhaps I am exagerating, but knowing where caches are located in this area I know that there would be far fewer should this become the norm.

 

Public property, parks, roadside barriers, bridges, historic plaques, etc. are some of the more popular sites.

 

In any case, with geocaching being such a little known (although growing) and there is nothing but a tupperware container with paper and a few toys involved, if placed in an area that does not change or destroy property, why should it be an issue? There certainly are far worse things that go on at these same locations. Does that make geocaching in a Walmart parking lot wrong, as I said, you decide. Just my opinion of course.

[+Renegade Knight]

I'll just help kick off some of the entertainment here with a simple question:

 

How do you KNOW that no permission was obtained?

 

Exactly! I don't know that permission was obtained. If there is not statement on the listing that it was then I have no reason to believe it was. If permission was obtained then the "owner" of the cache should have no qualms about stating so.

 

I really doubt though that permission was given to place a magnetic keyholder under the base shroud of a light pole in a Lowe's parking lot. (GCQD8P) (Yes, I did find it but just because I did in the past does not make it right.) I really don't think the owner of shopping center wants folks moving the cover and potentially exposing the wires and getting electrocuted.

 

Some common-sense must apply and placing this cache here does not show any.

 

Dan

 

Dan, any permission I obtain is between me and the land onwer. I do not owe you as a seeker any explanation for my cache as I am the one responsible. If you as a seeker are not comfortable stay a way and call it good. I do not list my permission status though I would gladly defend any cache I have placed with and without explicit permission. A vague doubt you have about any one cache is not much to work with and any one with any common cents should apply it and ask you for more than a vague doubt before they act.

 

As for having no qualms stating my permission status, you are right. I don't. But I also don't have the interest, time or inclination to answer queries from every Tom Dick and Harry either about the permission status of my caches. My placements are my business, your seekings are your business. Live within your comfort level. Email the owner if the cache is proving to be an issue and work it out directly. You will know when it's time to contact them. The land owner will be saying "what the hell are you doing" or there will be a ring of destruction around the cache that even with permission the land owner's not going to like.

[+biosearch]

One additional item. There was a recent post concerning liability. Someone in the UK (I think, it is a recent forum post so would not be difficult to find) was sued when a searcher (won't call them cacher as they don't sound like one) was injured while searching for the cache. Additionally the land owner was sued. It was dropped, but that is not really the issue. Should land owner, public officials, etc. focus on this, there won't be any caches at all. The funny thing is that I could fall off of a park bench on public land and would not be able to sue the city/county/state because I was the one at fault, but this may not be enough to stop others from stopping geocaching. Is there a solution to this? I don't know, other then simply continue on, take responsibility for your caches, try and make them safe and, for God sakes, have fun while doing it.

 

Then again, as usual, I could be wrong....

[+Renegade Knight]

One additional item. There was a recent post concerning liability. Someone in the UK (I think, it is a recent forum post so would not be difficult to find) was sued when a searcher (won't call them cacher as they don't sound like one) was injured while searching for the cache. Additionally the land owner was sued. It was dropped, but that is not really the issue. Should land owner, public officials, etc. focus on this, there won't be any caches at all. The funny thing is that I could fall off of a park bench on public land and would not be able to sue the city/county/state because I was the one at fault, but this may not be enough to stop others from stopping geocaching. Is there a solution to this? I don't know, other then simply continue on, take responsibility for your caches, try and make them safe and, for God sakes, have fun while doing it.

 

Then again, as usual, I could be wrong....

In idaho if you don't charge for the use of your lands for recreational purposes you are not liable for that use. If you do charge, then I guess the assumption is that you are making the land fit for the purpose you are charging for and fit would include the safety of the people doing the activity you are promoting. Not all areas have laws like that.

[+4 Walls]

 

 

Dan, any permission I obtain is between me and the land onwer. I do not owe you as a seeker any explanation for my cache as I am the one responsible. If you as a seeker are not comfortable stay a way and call it good. I do not list my permission status though I would gladly defend any cache I have placed with and without explicit permission. A vague doubt you have about any one cache is not much to work with and any one with any common cents should apply it and ask you for more than a vague doubt before they act.

 

As for having no qualms stating my permission status, you are right. I don't. But I also don't have the interest, time or inclination to answer queries from every Tom Dick and Harry either about the permission status of my caches. My placements are my business, your seekings are your business. Live within your comfort level. Email the owner if the cache is proving to be an issue and work it out directly. You will know when it's time to contact them. The land owner will be saying "what the hell are you doing" or there will be a ring of destruction around the cache that even with permission the land owner's not going to like.

 

I will agree with part of your statement and disagree with part.

 

I feel you do owe any potential cacher or seeker as you put it a simple statement in your description that you obtained permission from the owner/manager/lessee etc for placement of the cache. Then it is up to the individual to decide if he wants to trust that statement or not. If you give more information concerning the permission than it is more likely a seeker will look for the cache. Once you place a cache and request approval and it is approved it becomes the business of all geocachers, not just you. If you want it to be your business than don't post it.

 

I agree that anyone who has a problem or concern with any cache has the option to stop and leave. That is my stance from now on.

 

Something I don't understand is you tell me to email the owner of a cache and work things out, but then you tell me, " But I also don't have the interest, time or inclination to answer queries from every Tom Dick and Harry either about the permission status of my caches." Which way do you want it? You tell me that I should take a certain action with a cache "owner" but then basically tell us you don't care! Very Interesting attitude there!

 

So like I said I both agree and disagree with you. But I guess I disagree more than I agree.

[Clan Riffster]

I feel you do owe any potential cacher or seeker as you put it a simple statement in your description that you obtained permission from the owner/manager/lessee etc for placement of the cache.

 

Have you ever hidden a cache? Do you remember clicking the two boxes next to these statements?

 

Yes. I have read and understand the guidelines for listing a cache.

 

Yes. I have read and agree to the terms of use agreement.

 

By clicking those boxes, you're telling the reviewer, and the rest of the geocommunity, that "adequate" permission has been obtained. We'll save for another thread, what constitutes "adequate". There is no law requiring that you hunt for every cache out there. If you're squeamish about a particular hide, hit the "Delete" button. No need to call the geocops.

[+briansnat]

I feel you do owe any potential cacher or seeker as you put it a simple statement in your description that you obtained permission from the owner/manager/lessee etc for placement of the cache.

 

Have you ever hidden a cache? Do you remember clicking the two boxes next to these statements?

 

Yes. I have read and understand the guidelines for listing a cache.

 

Yes. I have read and agree to the terms of use agreement.

 

By clicking those boxes, you're telling the reviewer, and the rest of the geocommunity, that "adequate" permission has been obtained. We'll save for another thread, what constitutes "adequate". There is no law requiring that you hunt for every cache out there. If you're squeamish about a particular hide, hit the "Delete" button. No need to call the geocops.

True, but nearly every reviewer will will ask that you mention that you have permission on the page if they see that the cache is in private property with permission.

 

I think most of us are comfortable assuming adequate permission was obtained as long as the cache is hidden in a place where the public is invited. In the case of caches in places where your presence could get you arrested, I think its incumbent on the cache owner to let the searchers know that its OK for them to be there.

 

There are way too many people with your attitude, which is why so many clearly illegal caches have find after find before someone realizes that its wrong, takes a stand and reports the cache. One of the big selling points when we negotiate geocaching policies with land managers is that we have strict guidelines and we practice "self policing" where inappropriately placed caches are reported and removed. For this to work, its the responsibility of every geocacher to report caches that are illegal or violate the guidelines. The Sgt. Schultz, "I know nuuuthing, nuuuthing" additude doesn't cut it.

[+4 Walls]

I feel you do owe any potential cacher or seeker as you put it a simple statement in your description that you obtained permission from the owner/manager/lessee etc for placement of the cache.

 

Have you ever hidden a cache? Do you remember clicking the two boxes next to these statements?

 

Yes. I have read and understand the guidelines for listing a cache.

 

Yes. I have read and agree to the terms of use agreement.

 

By clicking those boxes, you're telling the reviewer, and the rest of the geocommunity, that "adequate" permission has been obtained. We'll save for another thread, what constitutes "adequate". There is no law requiring that you hunt for every cache out there. If you're squeamish about a particular hide, hit the "Delete" button. No need to call the geocops.

 

Yes, I have hidden caches.

 

And for the people who stop, read, understand the terms of use and guidelines for listing a cache and follow them before checkingthe boxes I apologize.

[Clan Riffster]

There are way too many people with your attitude

What, exactly, do you think my attitude is? In case my post was a bit muddled, I'll spell it out for you:

Illegally placed caches are bad for our game. No debate, no question. Where I get rankled, is when someone rushes to click the "SBA" button because they think a cache is illegally hidden. Doing so without the facts, places the burden of investigation on the reviewer's shoulders, when they've got enough to do already. In this day of almost instant data exchange, it is painfully easy for even a computer novice to determine if Person "A" had permission to hide a cache in Location "B". If I thought a cache was hidden illegally, I would take 5 minutes and determine the facts, rather than jump the gun. Somehow that's a bad attitude?

 

Assume you're a reviewer, doing your thing. Which E-mail would you prefer?

1: Hi Fred! I think GCABCD is an illegal hide. I saw a fence nearby, and it made me uncomfortable.

or

2: Hi Fred! We went in search of BillyBobNosePicker's cache, BellyButtonLint, GCABCD. Our initial observations led us to believe it might be there illegally. Our Garmin60CSx indicated it was past a barb wire fence. A thorough search of the area revealed only one access point to the property, which was gated. We searched the Seminole County Property Appraiser's website and determined the property belonged to Mary Smith, who resides at 123 Main St, Geneva Fl. 32732. (See Link) We found Mrs Smith's phone number, 407-123-4567, via the Internet, and called her. We explained geocaching to her, and asked if it was allowed on her property, and she gave a resounding "No". I think this one needs to be archived. Thanx!

 

I'm not a reviewer, so I can't speak for them, but I'd think that the second example would get the illegal cache archived a lot faster than the first one.

[+9Key]

Maybe the OP can post and example of what he considers private property. In the Lowe's example, the parking lot is clearly open to the public.

[+Packanack]

Ihave also seen multis where the clues for the various stages involve defacing public property such as writing in marker on signs and benches the next set of coordinates. This being done on private public property! It is just as bad as not getting permission for private property

!

 

I think one like that is deserving of having photos placed on the Cache Page and on the forum and a warning to remove issued, and if it is not removed then the hider loses privileges. Recently there was a spate fo graffiti like defacement in my area--nothing to do with caching-- but it is no different. Caching does not grant license to deface. I would still feel the same way if my car had not gotten tagged.

Edited October 6, 2006 by Packanack

[+StarBrand]

Continuing from my original post.

 

I have also seen multis where the clues for the various stages involve defacing public property such as writing in marker on signs and benches the next set of coordinates. This being done on private public property! It is just as bad as not getting permission for private property!

 

Dan

Any such cache needs to be SBA with a few photos - very tacky.

 

Having said that, I only hunt caches that I am comfortable doing. If I don't think I should go there or be there - I don't go. If I see a cache that clearly violates the guidelines - I will post an SBA. If I suspect it violates some guideline - I will email the owner and do a bit of research. In most cases, I trust previous logs and the owner to not mis-direct me. Worked for getting close to 5 years now.

[+Renegade Knight]

...

 

Something I don't understand is you tell me to email the owner of a cache and work things out, but then you tell me, " But I also don't have the interest, time or inclination to answer queries from every Tom Dick and Harry either about the permission status of my caches." Which way do you want it? You tell me that I should take a certain action with a cache "owner" but then basically tell us you don't care! Very Interesting attitude there!

 

So like I said I both agree and disagree with you. But I guess I disagree more than I agree.

 

We are closer than you think, or maybe not. I'd say maybe we agree more on the issue and less on the solution or the need for a solution. Some clarification:

 

You are right. Each person seeking a cache has to assess the cache. There are cachers who I trust to place micro's some I trust to tresspass, some I know seek permission and so on. It modifies how I approach their caches. If I'm not comfortable I'm not going to seek. We agree there though perhaps we would disagree on what level of comfort we have seeking. Fair enough. As for not having time for inquires questioning my judgment in placing, I don't. I don't need or want every cache seeker emailing me their opinion of my hide and how it doesn't fit their view of the world. However if they email me and say "there is a trail forming to your cache" then I have something concrete. Perhaps I used a game trail or perhaps I set it off trail but hoped it was far enough out of town so that a social trail would not form. Now I have information that I can use. If you are approached by a land owner and they say "get the hell off my land" that's also good information. "I think your cache is on private property" isn't since I know where I put the cache. It's entirly possible that I put it on a piece of land that farmer Brown thinks he owns but which I know is public. You would not be able to tell by looking.

 

Reporting facts and not speculation helps me as an owner assess the cache and the need to leave it alone, move it, archive it, or maybe even go talk to Farmer Brown and show him caching.

[+Renegade Knight]

Maybe the OP can post and example of what he considers private property. In the Lowe's example, the parking lot is clearly open to the public.

 

True. Any area of public accomodation is an area were we can consider placing a cache.

[+4 Walls]

...

 

Something I don't understand is you tell me to email the owner of a cache and work things out, but then you tell me, " But I also don't have the interest, time or inclination to answer queries from every Tom Dick and Harry either about the permission status of my caches." Which way do you want it? You tell me that I should take a certain action with a cache "owner" but then basically tell us you don't care! Very Interesting attitude there!

 

So like I said I both agree and disagree with you. But I guess I disagree more than I agree.

 

We are closer than you think, or maybe not. I'd say maybe we agree more on the issue and less on the solution or the need for a solution. Some clarification:

 

You are right. Each person seeking a cache has to assess the cache. There are cachers who I trust to place micro's some I trust to tresspass, some I know seek permission and so on. It modifies how I approach their caches. If I'm not comfortable I'm not going to seek. We agree there though perhaps we would disagree on what level of comfort we have seeking. Fair enough. As for not having time for inquires questioning my judgment in placing, I don't. I don't need or want every cache seeker emailing me their opinion of my hide and how it doesn't fit their view of the world. However if they email me and say "there is a trail forming to your cache" then I have something concrete. Perhaps I used a game trail or perhaps I set it off trail but hoped it was far enough out of town so that a social trail would not form. Now I have information that I can use. If you are approached by a land owner and they say "get the hell off my land" that's also good information. "I think your cache is on private property" isn't since I know where I put the cache. It's entirly possible that I put it on a piece of land that farmer Brown thinks he owns but which I know is public. You would not be able to tell by looking.

 

Reporting facts and not speculation helps me as an owner assess the cache and the need to leave it alone, move it, archive it, or maybe even go talk to Farmer Brown and show him caching.

 

Thanks for the clarification, I think you are right we are closer in opinion than I originally thought.

 

Dan

[+Team Dromomania]

Reviewers, SBA logs, posting in the forums and such can wait. First make an honest attempt to contact the owner giving them plenty of time to respond (may be on vacation). There is no need to cause an uproar where there may not be any problem. The owner may not want to post that they have specific permission for a cache in order to give the cacher a little "rush".

 

It's very easy to walk away from any cache which doesn't appeal to the searcher. Just go pm to the next cache which you know you'll enjoy.

 

As far as defacing property - a BIG NO NO in my book. But I still would go to the owner first with that problem.

[+Vinny & Sue Team]

I refuse to trespass to emplace a cache or to hunt a cache, and, in fact, I will not even go NEAR the edges of posted property or other kinds of private property (i.e., residential yards, cultivated farm fields) where it would be illegal to be present in order to seek a cache. And, if I notice that a cache is on posted or otherwise non-trespassable private property, and there is no note on the cache listing page explaining an exception, then I file an SBA or whatever they call it nowadays.

 

In the interests of full disclosure: The ONLY exception to what I have written above in any of my cache hunts occurred in April of this year when I was completing one of the stages of Quantum Leap in another part of the country, and in that case, it was not really private property, but just a military base with all kinds of silly warning signs on the fence, and we simply went under the fence. However, I had previously been assured by a representative of the cache owner that the commander of the military base had secretly given his permission for us to enter to retrieve the cache stage, so it was all right. In any case, I was able to explain it all to the satisfaction of the three FBI agents who came to visit me two months later, and it was no big deal. However, I would not do it again...

[+Snoogans]

Nudge, nudge, , he said knowingly.

[+IGJoe]

Personally, I try to only hunt caches that are on 'public-use' land, regardless if that land is privately held or not.

 

I cannot stand caches that are on private-use property or put you in questionable proximity to private-use land. I won't do caches that people have hidden in thier yard, no matter how explicit the permission is. Therefore I don't hunt them, sorry if that response is too reasonable.

 

Recently I hunted a cache that was in an undetermind wooded area between a bank and a residential neighborhood. So here I am in the woods behind someone's house tromping through bushes only a few feet from property markers. I have to ask myself 'would I want complete strangers periodically trolling the woods out my backdoor?' I didn't like it so I left, logged my DNF and let that be the end of it.

Edited October 7, 2006 by IGJoe

[+cimawr]

 

In any case, with geocaching being such a little known (although growing) and there is nothing but a tupperware container with paper and a few toys involved, if placed in an area that does not change or destroy property, why should it be an issue?

 

 

Hrm. Try checking out the thread from about a week ago, entitled "Not Quite A Rant".

 

To summarize the original post in that thread, one way in which such a cache can be a problem is when cachers are disturbing nearby homeowners to the point that they're calling police because they think the cachers are prowlers, regardless of the fact that the cache itself is not on private property.

[+wildchld97]

As for not having time for inquires questioning my judgment in placing, I don't. I don't need or want every cache seeker emailing me their opinion of my hide and how it doesn't fit their view of the world. However if they email me and say "there is a trail forming to your cache" then I have something concrete. Perhaps I used a game trail or perhaps I set it off trail but hoped it was far enough out of town so that a social trail would not form. Now I have information that I can use. If you are approached by a land owner and they say "get the hell off my land" that's also good information. "I think your cache is on private property" isn't since I know where I put the cache. It's entirly possible that I put it on a piece of land that farmer Brown thinks he owns but which I know is public. You would not be able to tell by looking.

 

Reporting facts and not speculation helps me as an owner assess the cache and the need to leave it alone, move it, archive it, or maybe even go talk to Farmer Brown and show him caching.

 

I agree with you. I don't really have the time to respond to each and every question that someone may have about a cache that I may own. However, I *do* read the posts from everyone who has found it (or not). In the case of my first cache that I placed (GCTT2P) , the land adjacent to the "River's edge" had always been public property until it was purchased *after* I had listed it.

 

When I had received an email from another cacher saying that there were "no trespassing signs on the *right* side of the parking area...I wrote the person back and let them know that it wasn't a problem because that wasn't where the cache was located. However, when I read the log from another cacher who was approched by an angry landowner I did some research doubletime into the property records. That's when I knew it was definitely time to pull up stakes and move on. Had the person not been approached by a property owner or posted in their log that there were NEW no trespassing signs in their log on the *left*side of the driveway, and *knowing* that this land had been used for generations for fishing and boat launching purposes...it probably wouln't have been archived as fast.

 

My point is to be as accurate and descriptive as you can for the reason WHY you think it SBA. If an owner reads the logs and sees a real problem I would think that they wouldn't hesitate to at least check into the matter. Logs that just state, "felt uncomfortable being close to several "no tresspassing signs" doesn't tell me a thing since I knew that there *were* a few of them...but not where the cache was hidden.

 

I just got off of work and my brain is scrambled. Sorry if I rambled.

[+Klondike Mike]

People in our community seem to turn a blind eye to any possible guideline infractions. We have this cache with only one small parking area. In the middle of that parking spot is a sign clearly displaying Private Property, No Parking and Unauthorized Entry Prohibited . So far the found it logs simply ignore the obvious or only elude to a problem.

One day hides like this may come back to bite them but until then, I guess, mums the word

Edited October 9, 2006 by Klondike Mike

[+sbell111]

People in our community seem to turn a blind eye to any possible guideline infractions. We have this cache with only one small parking area. In the middle of that parking spot is a sign clearly displaying Private Property, No Parking and Unauthorized Entry Prohibited . So far the found it logs simply ignore the obvious or only elude to a problem.

One day hides like this may come back to bite them but until then, I guess, mums the word

I took a look at the cache page and couldn't find any instruction to park in that lot. Looking at the maps, it doesn't appear that the cache is hidden in the lot. If I were looking for this cache, I'd park somewhere else, as I'm sure that you did.

[+Klondike Mike]

People in our community seem to turn a blind eye to any possible guideline infractions. We have this cache with only one small parking area. In the middle of that parking spot is a sign clearly displaying Private Property, No Parking and Unauthorized Entry Prohibited . So far the found it logs simply ignore the obvious or only elude to a problem.

One day hides like this may come back to bite them but until then, I guess, mums the word

I took a look at the cache page and couldn't find any instruction to park in that lot. Looking at the maps, it doesn't appear that the cache is hidden in the lot. If I were looking for this cache, I'd park somewhere else, as I'm sure that you did.

 

The cache isn't in the parking area. It's in the natural area 261 meters south of that parking spot. The parking area is the only access point to that natural area. There is a 6 foot high chainlink fence with a pedestrian gate and also a vehicle gate. If you read the cache page then I assume you took the time to read some of the logs. In the 1ft found it log the cacher posted "Wasn't sure about the parking on the Whitemud... We found a "road" that was not fenced of or marked with any 'Keep Out' signs. It actually took us almost 1km in and about 500m from the cache." The reply from the owner was "Pteryx found a neat way in - but I think it's actually private property. In any case - there is access from the whitemud. " The whitemud he refers to is where the parking area with the sign is.

[+4 Walls]

My final words on this topic include a quote from an email from a person who hid a cache. I questioned whether or not permission was received for some caches and this is the response I got.

 

I should not have to explain to you wheather or not I have gained permission for

any of the caches I place. that is between me and my reviewer, and for your

information all of my caches that need permission, permission has been issued.

 

Whether or not a person has received permission to hide a cache is the business of poetential seekers. It is not a matter just between the hider and the reviewer. Anyone who does not take steps to reasonably assure you that appropriate permission has been received in my opinion probably does not have permission.

 

So my advice to anyone seeking caches on private property, and malls, parking lots etc are private property is be very careful. Even with assurances from the "owner" of the cache unless they provide specific and verifiable information concerning the cache you may unwittingly be searching for an inappropriately based or even illegally placed cache.

 

If you are stopped for trespassing or worse while caching you must demonstrate that you "reasonably had cause to believe" your actions were appropriate. Its a jungle out there, watch your back.

 

Dan

[+Team Laxson]

I have been reading this thread since your original e-mail went out. I have, until now, chosen not to post on the subject.

 

Before continuing, please keep in mind that the view expressed below is my personal opinion. If you agree, disagree, or chose to remain neutral, that is a decision you will make.

 

<my opinion, on topic>

Yes, there are caches that make me uncomfortable searching. Nervous isn't the right word. I am doing nothing wrong. I am enjoying a family activity. If I give someone the impression that I am doing something wrong, then 'someone' will chose an action (ignore, spy, confront, etc).

If I am uncomfortable searching for a cache, I will not search for it. If the reason for my discomfort is due to a 'no trespassing' or 'Private Property' sign, I will e-mail the owner my concerns. To what end? The right one. Do I need to know what the answer is? Probably not. It may feel 'good' to know, but it isn't required that the cache owner reply.

 

<end of my opinion>

 

Dan,

I understand your concern regarding 'questionable' caches. I can relate to your discomfort, and I think many of us have felt the same way. However, for the specifics you've given in this thread, these caches are within my comfort zone. If you've contacted CO Admin regarding your concern and the cache remains published, it's safe to say any necessary permission has been granted.

 

Permission, however, will not make anyone less uncomfortable searching for these caches.

[+Team Dromomania]

Not every cache is designed to be reached by a car. In this area we have several long isolated bike trails where one must ride a bike or hike in to nab those caches. Also, there are several "guard rail" type road hides on roads with NO legal or safe parking nearby. Again, walking or biking is the only sane option to nab those caches. If I see "no parking" signs, I obey them only to sometimes having to walk in to the location after parking a mile or more away.

 

In my mind parking issues have nothing to do with the cache itself. And I assume that the cache had been placed in line with the geocaching guidelines.

 

In sticking to the topic of the thread, I'd be nervous if I was parking illegally just to make a cache find a bit quicker.