Caching or Littering?

[ScottFla]

I can understand the environmental worries, but aren't there a million things we all do every day that are worse for the environment? Driving to the cache site comes to mind....

 

Is an ammo box hidden at the back of a tree really going to damage the environment? sure, 20-40 people a year might walk on a well defined path, take a few steps off the path to find the cache. How exactly does that damage the environment more than driving a car to the cache?

[+sbell111]

Sure, proximity and location can exacerbate the problem! I'm not likely to argue with that!

You haven't yet convinced anyone that a problem exists.

[+fox-and-the-hound]

 

I was really taken aback when I saw the huge increase in volume in my area since 2003; I disagree with the discription 'sparesly' when we are taking in these comparative terms. If all these caches were rounded up it would amount to an enormous volume of debris - litter -

 

- my concerns for the environment outweight the whims of geocachers hell-bent on placing more and more hides; where does it stop? - that is my motivation.

 

I hope that straightens you out.

 

The fact that you're concerned at all is an admirable quality we tend to find in the vast majority of cachers. That being said, I disagree with the idea that this enormous volume of debris equates to litter. If you want to look at non-natural debris just look at all the man-made items of any kind within 500 feet. I'm quite sure it amounts to much more than the volume of any caches. It's akin to worrying about the flea on a wild dog that's running loose near you.

 

Your concern for the environment should outweigh cache placement. The next time you place a cache, keep it in mind. In the meanwhile, take a look at those caches you're concerned about. If you see guideline violations then please report them. We've found the same good things other cachers are reporting here. Primarily "cache-saturated" areas tend to have far less litter and the individual caches are being visited less often.

 

So bully for you for caring and bringing it to the forum. CITO is a beautiful thing and practiced by cachers regularly. Do your part while you're caching and you'll quickly realize the volume you're removing is much greater than the volume of that "debris" that's being placed and maintained.

[+Happy Humphrey]

I can understand the environmental worries, but aren't there a million things we all do every day that are worse for the environment? Driving to the cache site comes to mind....

 

Is an ammo box hidden at the back of a tree really going to damage the environment? sure, 20-40 people a year might walk on a well defined path, take a few steps off the path to find the cache. How exactly does that damage the environment more than driving a car to the cache?

It's a little difficult to understand the POV of the OP exactly, but I don't think he's concerned about the damage caused by the cacher trail. It's a matter of all those boxes scattered about making the place look unsightly (I guess they don't hide them very well in those parts!).

 

Senseless: if you brought all the clearly visible geocache boxes in from your area (this is only for the sake of argument, I'm not suggesting putting this into practice), and then made another heap of all the other visible man-made items in the area (REALLY don't do that ), I suspect you'd have a better perspective on the "problem"! I also suspect that the CITO items removed over the years would be a bigger heap than the caches.

[magellan315]

I'm confused. Your concerned about the increase in the number of caches in your area, the impact it might have on the environment, and they may have reached the number you consider unacceptable. But you have not been to any of them to see if there is any impact.

 

You feel that the volume of caches in your area when taken as a group create an enormous amount of litter. So archive your caches and help reduce the number. Better yet get involved in a CITO, you'll be surprised the amount of trash a group of Geocachers can remove and how that compares to the number of Geocaches in that immediate location.

 

Your skeptical that Geocachers don't pick up trash or enjoy the walk to and from the cache, yet you haven't been Geocaching or even attended an event cache in close to three years so you have no actual knowledge of what Geocachers are doing currently.

 

Your think you encourging debate, when in reality all you are demonstarting is that you are unaware of how Geocaching has changed. There are Geocaching groups that range from local regions to entire states. Geocaching is considered an acceptable low impact activity by many land managers at the regional, state, and national level. With Geocaching classes taught at local parks by area Geocachers. Some land preservation organizations use Geocaching as a fund raising activity.

 

Please go enjoy the Geocaches in your area, then come back and let us know if your concerns were as serious as you thoguht they were.

Edited January 4, 2007 by magellan315

[CoyoteRed]

I wonder how the sheer tonnage of caches compares with the sheer tonnage of trash CITOed?

 

Here's a log from a small CITO event. 3 and one half tons of trash and scrap metal.

 

So, have we put more "litter" into the environment or taken it out?

[Col. Angus]

Ok...I looked it up...

 

Definitions of 'litter' (lĭtər) - 12 definitions - The American Heritage® Dictionary

 

litter (n.) A disorderly accumulation of objects; a pile.

litter (v.) To give birth to (a litter).

litter (v.) To give birth to a litter.

 

Since, as cachers, we are not giving birth to multiple off-spring nor are the chaches themselves a disorderly accumulation of objects, but a well maintained object of sport, we are not littering. I agree, if they are too close together, it takes the sport and enjoyment out of it.

 

Again, I just started my geocaching lifestyle yesterday, so what do I know huh?

 

Angus

[BRTango]

I wonder how the sheer tonnage of caches compares with the sheer tonnage of trash CITOed?

 

Here's a log from a small CITO event. 3 and one half tons of trash and scrap metal.

 

So, have we put more "litter" into the environment or taken it out?

 

I don't about all this... I mean afterall, lock-n-lock's are pretty heavy!!

[+briansnat]

Cache visits could diminish with time because there are more to choose from? - Have you considered that it could be because all the local cachers have hit them and visits are less numerous as they come from further afield? To test these independant variables you would at least need to know the rate that new geocachers arrive in a known area.

 

I was referring to NEW caches. 5 years ago there were perhaps 30 active geocachers in my state and about 100 caches. Now there are a few hundred cachers and thousands of caches.

 

So 5 years ago when I placed a new cache most of those 30 some cachers would hit my cache within the first few months. So each new cache would see heavy activity throughout the first few months of its life, then visits would tail off once most of the locals found it.

 

Now when I place there is no longer a 3 month long stampede to each cache. Visits are sporadic throughout the life of the cache. Even though there are many more geocachers in the area there are considerably more caches for them to find, which spreads out the impact at any one cache site.

 

My conclusion is that geocachers are generally 'waypoint collectors' blindly following their GPSr screen, with no real interest in the (rural) environment in which they find themselves, and that they are ambivalent about the impact of their activities. This is a shame since the origins of the sport were closely linked to worthy causes such as development of navigational skills, outdoor pursuits and a respect for the environment.

 

I assume that in order to reach this conclusion you've interviewed all of the geocachers in your area to find out what motivates them. Well the geocachers where I live are quite different from the ones in your area I guess. Most of them care deeply about the environment. Some have developed their regard for the environment thanks to geocaching. Others have had it long before they ever discovered the sport. I know many who have been active advocates for the environment for many years and who have volunteered thousands of hours building and maintaining hiking trails, cleaning parks and working to protect land from development.

 

The ones I know are 'experience collectors'. They use geocaching as a way to discover new and interesting places. Some of them have become advocates for those places because they developed an appreciation of them and thus a desire to protect them.

 

If all these caches were rounded up it would amount to an enormous volume of debris

 

I fail to see the signifance of that. If you were to round up all of the the hiking trail blazes and trail use signs it would also amount to an enormous volume of debris.

Edited January 4, 2007 by briansnat

[Jeremy]

It IS littering - discarding man-made material in a natural environment.

 

Discarding is a poor definition for hiding a cache. The next time you discard your car in a parking lot make sure you leave the keys in the ignition so someone can drive it to the local landfill.

[+Bill & Tammy]

Without the required information (the cache coordinates) and the prerequisite device (a GPSr) one would be pretty hard pressed to even that a cache or a number of caches were present in their enviroment. When I first discovered geocaching I suddenly became aware of several caches that were along trails I had travelled often but had no idea these things existed out there. Most geocaches, unlike litter are very cleverly hidden and blend in with their surrounds and do not present any kind of eyesore.

 

I can think of many more leisure activities that leave a much greater human footprint in the enviroment than geocaching.

Edited January 4, 2007 by Bill & Tammy

[+Renegade Knight]

...

Again, I just started my geocaching lifestyle yesterday, so what do I know huh?

 

Angus

 

Enough to be a fine addition to the forums. I look forward to more of your posts.

[+Ambrosia]

"which of those caches do you think is too close to another? .. do you think are of sufficiently poor quality that they shouldn't be there? ...hasn't been in a high-quality, enjoyable location".

 

Paul G0TLG - I have no arguement with any of the specific points you raise, with this specific area in mind. But your arguements are all from a geocacher-specific perspective, not from an general environmental perspective!

 

Proximity, quality, location are not factors when considering whether it is or is not littering in my point of view. It IS littering - discarding man-made material in a natural environment. Is it acceptable, and to what level is the point for consideration - It is approaching the limit in my point of view.

 

ST

 

PS Glad you enjoyed the cache :0)

If it is not acceptable, then it's not acceptable to place even *one* cache, let alone the thousands that are out there now.

 

It's fine to bring up this question for us to think about, but I find it amusing that you own caches and are now bringing up this question.

[+kayak-cowboy]

I have 6 caches within a 5 mile radius of my home zip code. I have done 5 of the 6 and noticed NO environmental impact on the hide locations. They are a mix of regular full size and micros. Also a puzzle cache that took me to a historical marker that I had no idea was even there. That is what I like about Geocaching.

[+briansnat]

It IS littering - discarding man-made material in a natural environment. Is it acceptable, and to what level is the point for consideration - It is approaching the limit in my point of view.

 

Fortunately for us your point of view is not the same as the numerous local, county and state park systems, as well as the BLM, US Forest Service and many private nature preserves, which have all found geocaching to be an appropriate use of the land.

Edited January 4, 2007 by briansnat

[nonaeroterraqueous]

If all these caches were rounded up it would amount to an enormous volume of debris - litter - when even 3 years ago this volume would have been negligable. My concern is for the environmental impact of this activity and whether the volume of spurious debris left in the countryside should be limited - my concerns for the environment outweight the whims of geocachers hell-bent on placing more and more hides; where does it stop? - that is my motivation.

Do you normally play with debris? Seriously, if you do, then I've got a dumpster you can just have a real ball with if you want. I'm beginning to think you may be responsible for those notorious MAGNETIC DUMPSTER CACHES. Might as well call all artificial objects debris.