Potential Problem Caches

[+Too Tall John]

 

If a landowner asks GC.com to have a cache removed because no permission was given for the cache, there should be consequences. I'd suggest that the cache hider would be placed on probation for a certain time period or until they can fulfill certain requirements. They could still hunt caches unrestricted, but would couldn't hide caches until the probation was over.

 

 

oh, i'd'a' gotten busted but good on that one.

 

i had a cache WITH PERMISSION AND COLLABORATION of a facility manager. over the summer the management chaged. the new manager did not like the cache and went ballistic. not my fault.

 

And with the worksheet filled out, you'd have been back in business. Frustrating, though, isn't it?

[+Too Tall John]

Oops, double post...

 

There is nothing to see here. Ignore the little man behind the curtain!

Edited February 27, 2007 by Too Tall John

[+Criminal]

As one who has been detained till the police came by a restaurant owner when looking for a cache in the bushes in front of his restaurant, I can vouch that this does happen.

Detained? A restaurant owner does not have the authority to detain anyone. If you stayed, you stayed voluntarily.

 

I'd like to hear more about that.

 

Legally or not, he was detained.

 

(Not making any insinuations about size as I have no idea what Mr. T is like, but) If Mr. T's say 5'5" tall and weighs in at 150 lbs and the restaurant's owner is 6'6" and 250 lbs & looks like Mr T's avatar, unless he can outrun him, Mr. T is gonna stay where ever the guy wants him to. Not to mention many people aren't up on laws pertaining to situations like this.

 

Criminal's right, folks, the restaurateur had no right to detain Mr. T.

Damnn I like hearing that!

 

Seriously though, IANAL but I’m pretty sure he cannot detain you unless he witnesses you committing a felony. If he tries to physically hold on to you, that is assault. I would not have stayed.

[+tozainamboku]

As one who has been detained till the police came by a restaurant owner when looking for a cache in the bushes in front of his restaurant, I can vouch that this does happen.

Detained? A restaurant owner does not have the authority to detain anyone. If you stayed, you stayed voluntarily.

 

I'd like to hear more about that.

 

Legally or not, he was detained.

 

(Not making any insinuations about size as I have no idea what Mr. T is like, but) If Mr. T's say 5'5" tall and weighs in at 150 lbs and the restaurant's owner is 6'6" and 250 lbs & looks like Mr T's avatar, unless he can outrun him, Mr. T is gonna stay where ever the guy wants him to. Not to mention many people aren't up on laws pertaining to situations like this.

 

Criminal's right, folks, the restaurateur had no right to detain Mr. T.

Damnn I like hearing that!

 

Seriously though, IANAL but I’m pretty sure he cannot detain you unless he witnesses you committing a felony. If he tries to physically hold on to you, that is assault. I would not have stayed.

This discussion is getting off topic. But since you asked. The cache was hidden in the lanscaping by the entrance to the restaurant. This was my second visit. Both times I was there it was shortly before the restauarant opened for lunch. The first time I did not go into the landscaping and in fact avoided certain parts of the restaurant other that the parking lot and some exterior walls. An employee saw me looking but since I wasn't going someplace I didn't belong he didn't stop me. After I DNF'd the cache owner sent me a hint that it was in the landscaping. I went back and started looking in the landscaping. The employee saw me and went inside to call the owner. He came out and ask what I was doing. When I tried to explain geocaching to him he wasn't interested. He told me to wait while he called the police. He left his employee to watch me. I thought about just getting in my car and driving away but this guy was angry and I didn't know what he would do. It also occurred to me that the police might be more suspicious if I had driven away instead of waiting. They almost certainly would have my license plate number if I did. So I waited on the bench where the overflow crowd would wait for their number to called. When the officer arrived, he first had the owner and employee go inside while he interviewed me. I explained geocaching to him which he pretended to have never heard of. I didn't have my GPS with me since I already knew from the owner the cache was in the landscaping. I also hadn't found the cache yet so I couldn't show the cop where it was. I told him that if the cache wasn't placed with permission I could get it removed. He told me to make sure I took care of getting the cache remove (I still hadn't found it) and I could go. After I listed the SBA, the cache owners contacted the owner of the restaurant to explain what had happened and got permission to hide the cache there. They also bought me dinner at the restaurant .

To bring this back on topic. This cache wouldn't have cause a problem if the permission had been asked before it was placed. Also it would have been less likely to cause a problem if the cache had been placed in a location that the public would generally be expected to be. You are not generally expected to go into the landscaping at a business. Finally, had there been a spoiler hint, I probably would have grabbed the cache, signed the log, and left before the employee even noticed me.

Edited February 27, 2007 by tozainamboku

[+Criminal]

This discussion is getting off topic. But since you asked. The cache was hidden in the lanscaping by the entrance to the restaurant. This was my second visit. Both times I was there it was shortly before the restauarant opened for lunch. The first time I did not go into the landscaping and in fact avoided certain parts of the restaurant other that the parking lot and some exterior walls. An employee saw me looking but since I wasn't going someplace I didn't belong he didn't stop me. After I DNF'd the cache owner sent me a hint that it was in the landscaping. I went back and started looking in the landscaping. The employee saw me and went inside to call the owner. He came out and ask what I was doing. When I tried to explain geocaching to him he wasn't interested. He told me to wait while he called the police. He left his employee to watch me. I thought about just getting in my car and driving away but this guy was angry and I didn't know what he would do. It also occurred to me that the police might be more suspicious if I had driven away instead of waiting. They almost certainly would have my license plate number if I did. So I waited on the bench where the overflow crowd would wait for their number to called. When the officer arrived, he first had the owner and employee go inside while he interviewed me. I explained geocaching to him which he pretended to have never heard of. I didn't have my GPS with me since I already knew from the owner the cache was in the landscaping. I also hadn't found the cache yet so I couldn't show the cop where it was. I told him that if the cache wasn't placed with permission I could get it removed. He told me to make sure I took care of getting the cache remove (I still hadn't found it) and I could go. After I listed the SBA, the cache owners contacted the owner of the restaurant to explain what had happened and got permission to hide the cache there. They also bought me dinner at the restaurant .

To bring this back on topic. This cache wouldn't have cause a problem if the permission had been asked before it was placed. Also it would have been less likely to cause a problem if the cache had been placed in a location that the public would generally be expected to be. You are not generally expected to go into the landscaping at a business. Finally, had there been a spoiler hint, I probably would have grabbed the cache, signed the log, and left before the employee even noticed me.

Wow, very interesting. I won’t criticize the way you handled it since I wasn’t there. I still would have left if it were me though. The manager writing down my tag number wouldn’t matter.

 

What’s funny about your story is that there is (or was) one exactly like that near my office. I went out at lunch to find it, saw where it probably was located, and drove away. I figured that since I wasn’t going to enjoy looking for it I shouldn’t bother.

[+knoffer]

Anything near electrical devices can be dangerous.

 

Uninsulated wire caused boy's death

 

Johnnygeo's Geocaching Electrical Safety Blog

 

The above links are very real and could easily happen to anyone. It will probably never happen to anyone we know however it is possible.

 

Drug stashes? I have seen evidence of drug use on many cache hunts. I have only once found a joint in a cache. Other then that I have not found drugs stashed at a cache location. Is it possible? Of course it is.

 

I do know of a cache that is placed on state land with permission that is behind an Auto salvage yard where two cachers were handcuffed at gunpoint and detained for 1 1/2 hrs because the Salvage yard property owner called the Cops. GENIUS LOCI & HUTT DEATAINED AT GUNPOINT BY THE LAKE COUNTY SHERIFF'S POLICE!!!!

 

Like anything else in life Geocaching has risks.

[+mikeslomka]

Wow, very interesting. I won’t criticize the way you handled it since I wasn’t there. I still would have left if it were me though. The manager writing down my tag number wouldn’t matter.

 

What’s funny about your story is that there is (or was) one exactly like that near my office. I went out at lunch to find it, saw where it probably was located, and drove away. I figured that since I wasn’t going to enjoy looking for it I shouldn’t bother.

 

I think that he handled it very well. Had he just made a rude comment and driven away, the restaurant owner would have never allowed the cache to be left there. By sticking around, he gave himself some credibility, and the situation worked out for the best in the end.

 

That being said, had the cache owner gotten permission when he originally placed the cache, this would have never been an issue. The employee would have looked outside and said, "There's another one of those geocachers out there." and that would have been the end of it.

[+ArmandoM]

Wow, very interesting. I won’t criticize the way you handled it since I wasn’t there. I still would have left if it were me though. The manager writing down my tag number wouldn’t matter.

 

What’s funny about your story is that there is (or was) one exactly like that near my office. I went out at lunch to find it, saw where it probably was located, and drove away. I figured that since I wasn’t going to enjoy looking for it I shouldn’t bother.

 

I agree with Criminal here!

[Clan Riffster]

Groundspeak can't instruct the Reviewers to require express permission on CPCs first because CPCs can't be defined, and few CPCs really need it.

CPC's are defined as caches on commercial property. I know I can almost always tell just by glancing at a cache page when a cache is a CPC. I assume the reviewers are at least as capable as I am. I recognize that, under the current guideline interpretation, (see no evil/hear no evil/speak no evil), CPC's don't require explicit permission, since the potential cache would be hidden in a location that the public is allowed. This in-house interpretation is what I would like to see changed. I think this would be a good thing, as it would significantly decrease any negative cacher/muggle contacts, and would show the retailers that we cachers in general respect them and their property.

 

I think Kit Fox's comments are no worse than TAR's saying that even if someone can show that drugs have been found in a cache location they aren't going to change their mind on the subject.

And far less insulting than the Chicken Little label applied so wantonly to those who express concern over what they perceive to be a problem.

 

We do not have problem caches, we have problem cachers

That loud "Thunk" y'all heard was a big nail being hit squarely on the head. Thanx WimseyGuy!

[+Too Tall John]

Groundspeak can't instruct the Reviewers to require express permission on CPCs first because CPCs can't be defined, and few CPCs really need it.

CPC's are defined as caches on commercial property. I know I can almost always tell just by glancing at a cache page when a cache is a CPC. I assume the reviewers are at least as capable as I am. I recognize that, under the current guideline interpretation, (see no evil/hear no evil/speak no evil), CPC's don't require explicit permission, since the potential cache would be hidden in a location that the public is allowed. This in-house interpretation is what I would like to see changed. I think this would be a good thing, as it would significantly decrease any negative cacher/muggle contacts, and would show the retailers that we cachers in general respect them and their property.

Yes! Not to mention it's the right thing to do.

I think Kit Fox's comments are no worse than TAR's saying that even if someone can show that drugs have been found in a cache location they aren't going to change their mind on the subject.

And far less insulting than the Chicken Little label applied so wantonly to those who express concern over what they perceive to be a problem.

As I'm the only one who's used the Chicken Little analogy recently, I have to wonder if you are referring to me. While the original story ended up being a bad analogy for my point, in the Disney version of Chicken Little, CL ran around screaming about aliens. He was right in the end. With that in mind, I say go ahead, call me Chicken Little.

We do not have problem caches, we have problem cachers

That loud "Thunk" y'all heard was a big nail being hit squarely on the head. Thanx WimseyGuy!

Umm... don't forget CPCs placed without permission. I'd say that's an example of problem caches as a group. Or would you say the cacher who placed them without asking is the problem? Hmm... which came first? Chicken Little or the egg?

[Mr.Yuck]

Groundspeak can't instruct the Reviewers to require express permission on CPCs first because CPCs can't be defined, and few CPCs really need it.

CPC's are defined as caches on commercial property. I know I can almost always tell just by glancing at a cache page when a cache is a CPC. I assume the reviewers are at least as capable as I am. I recognize that, under the current guideline interpretation, (see no evil/hear no evil/speak no evil), CPC's don't require explicit permission, since the potential cache would be hidden in a location that the public is allowed. This in-house interpretation is what I would like to see changed. I think this would be a good thing, as it would significantly decrease any negative cacher/muggle contacts, and would show the retailers that we cachers in general respect them and their property.

 

I too can almost always tell when a cache is a CPC just by looking at the cache page, and the map links. Heck, I was looking at some caches for a trip out of town in 3 weeks, and I could pick 'em out there no problem as well. The reviewers are currently tasked with looking at cemetery caches and asking for explicit permission. I've seen a few relatively recent cemetery caches that I suspect have slipped between the cracks, but almost every cemetery cache I've seen since the 2005 incident states permission in the body of the cache description, leading me to believe the reviewers "caught it".

 

I guess what I'm saying is, the reviewers could look at CPC's and ask for explicit permission, with a very low hit-miss ratio. Or should that be high hit miss ratio?

[+Team GeoBlast]

Groundspeak can't instruct the Reviewers to require express permission on CPCs first because CPCs can't be defined, and few CPCs really need it.

CPC's are defined as caches on commercial property. I know I can almost always tell just by glancing at a cache page when a cache is a CPC. I assume the reviewers are at least as capable as I am. I recognize that, under the current guideline interpretation, (see no evil/hear no evil/speak no evil), CPC's don't require explicit permission, since the potential cache would be hidden in a location that the public is allowed. This in-house interpretation is what I would like to see changed. I think this would be a good thing, as it would significantly decrease any negative cacher/muggle contacts, and would show the retailers that we cachers in general respect them and their property.

 

I too can almost always tell when a cache is a CPC just by looking at the cache page, and the map links. Heck, I was looking at some caches for a trip out of town in 3 weeks, and I could pick 'em out there no problem as well. The reviewers are currently tasked with looking at cemetery caches and asking for explicit permission. I've seen a few relatively recent cemetery caches that I suspect have slipped between the cracks, but almost every cemetery cache I've seen since the 2005 incident states permission in the body of the cache description, leading me to believe the reviewers "caught it".

 

I guess what I'm saying is, the reviewers could look at CPC's and ask for explicit permission, with a very low hit-miss ratio. Or should that be high hit miss ratio?

 

I think there is three ways to approach CPCs (thanks for yet another acronym Ranster).

 

1. Carry on. Assume that the property owners either have given permission or don't care. The upside of this is that PLCs and LPCs can continue to be placed at their current rate and the people that enjoy hiding and finding them will enjoy geocaching more and more.

2. Motivate GC.com to acknowledge that the current system is really not working and that the majority of the CPCs are not legal per their own guidelines and the local property laws. GC.com makes changes to correct this. The upside to this is that GC.com starts behaving like a credible organization concerned with it's own future while showing respect for property that is owned by others. Individual cachers are now not forced into having to judge the legality of every urban cache they seek and risk making bad decisions.

3. Approach the major property owners (Big Boxes for example) on a corporate level and ask them for blanket permission ala Cracker Barrel. The upside of this is that this issue will be out in the open and the risk of a very public ban of geocaching is taken away. Once blanket permission is granted we can all feel a little safer when finding these caches.

 

As for #3, I'd be interested in hearing from anyone here that has actually followed GC.com guidelines and got real permission to put a cache in a Big Box Store parking lot. How did you do it? What channels did you follow?

Edited February 28, 2007 by Team GeoBlast

[+Team GeoBlast]

Anything near electrical devices can be dangerous.

 

Uninsulated wire caused boy's death

 

Johnnygeo's Geocaching Electrical Safety Blog

 

The above links are very real and could easily happen to anyone. It will probably never happen to anyone we know however it is possible.

 

Drug stashes? I have seen evidence of drug use on many cache hunts. I have only once found a joint in a cache. Other then that I have not found drugs stashed at a cache location. Is it possible? Of course it is.

 

I do know of a cache that is placed on state land with permission that is behind an Auto salvage yard where two cachers were handcuffed at gunpoint and detained for 1 1/2 hrs because the Salvage yard property owner called the Cops. GENIUS LOCI & HUTT DEATAINED AT GUNPOINT BY THE LAKE COUNTY SHERIFF'S POLICE!!!!

 

Like anything else in life Geocaching has risks.

 

After reading that story and the intent to call the owner of the store and threaten them with a law suit ect. I wonder what that owner is going to say when another cacher approaches him to hide a cache near his store? Can we expect this business owner to keep quiet in his own network? A no win situation.

[Clan Riffster]

As for #3, I'd be interested in hearing from anyone here that has actually followed GC.com guidelines and got real permission to put a cache in a Big Box Store parking lot. How did you do it? What channels did you follow?

I have one in a Winn Dixie parking lot. We talked to the store manager, and he thought it was "Neat". He couldn't give approval for any store but his, but it certainly opened the door for others later on. I prefer permissions given at a local level, as opposed to blanket permissions, but that's just me.

[+PJPeters]

...He couldn't give approval for any store but his, but it certainly opened the door for others later on. I prefer permissions given at a local level, as opposed to blanket permissions, but that's just me.

I think local permission needs to be the standard. Granted, they may have to go to the Regional/Corporate level to get ultimate permission, but the local operator would be the best place to start. First off, s/he would know who to contact at the Main Office. Also, s/he's the one that knows the neighborhood, and whether it would be safe for such a cache, whereas the Corporate Conglomerate-Controlled Puppets (CCCPs) would be more likely to slap a blanket denial for all their operations.

[+Too Tall John]

...He couldn't give approval for any store but his, but it certainly opened the door for others later on. I prefer permissions given at a local level, as opposed to blanket permissions, but that's just me.

I think local permission needs to be the standard. Granted, they may have to go to the Regional/Corporate level to get ultimate permission, but the local operator would be the best place to start. First off, s/he would know who to contact at the Main Office. Also, s/he's the one that knows the neighborhood, and whether it would be safe for such a cache, whereas the Corporate Conglomerate-Controlled Puppets (CCCPs) would be more likely to slap a blanket denial for all their operations.

I wholeheartedly agree that permission at a local level is essential, but that for most of the bigger Big Box Stores (BBSs) permission is probably needed at a corperate level. At the rate Wal-Mart moves its management around from store to store, you're also likely to have 2 or 3 managers in a store during the lifetime of the cache. It'd make permission easier to get if a memo came down from "up high" saying (imagine a big, booming voice and angel choirs here)

 

"Oh, Store Manager! We that are of the Office of On High do declair and decree to thee this day this one thing: If a lowly, humble geocacher should ever pass your way, you should not turn your eyes in disapproval! No, you shall welcome them in the name of the Office of On High! You shall make for them a place to keep their most prized cache and you shall call it a LPC. For once, like the god of Groundspeak that they follow, we too were a company that all looked down upon, thinking that we would not last until the next season. But, lo! We are strong and mighty, and are called to help those who are lost and wandering, even though they hold in their very hands a device that can show them the way."

 

Ok, it's more likely to say "Geocaching, a popular global treasure hunt, attracts a demographic that is shown to buy lots of batteries. To attract such customers, you are authorized to extend permission to place geocaches on store property, provided it follows all other store policies currently in place. Get with your Department 82 associate and have them set up a "Geocaching Central" display, planogram to follow in the next modular download."

 

Oh, the Dept 82 associate handles batteries, items at the checkout, and all the useless stuff you find hanging around the store in random places on clipstrips. Some of it's great swag.

 

This, of course, is all dependant on if the H.O. says "Yes," which I actually doubt.

[+geomann1]

As a fairly new geocache, with 4 active hides I would like to throw in my two cents.

 

First, obtaining formal legal permission on commercial properties will in most instances be very difficult for legal (liability) reasons. The path of least resistance is to say no.

 

I agree that placing a catch in an area open to the public is not illegal, even if no permission is granted. If the land is not posted, one can just be asked to remove it.

 

Common sense is in order. I don't like sneaking around in the bushes next to a restaurant and LPCs are just plain lame. They have been done SO WHY BOTHER WITH MORE? How about some creativity? It seems that many geocachers are obsessed with their count rather than just having fun. I realize different strokes for different folks, but to me a cache should be placed in a safe area where the finder can enjoy his or her search.

 

I would hate to see a requirement for more explicit permission from GC, as it would stiffle the sport. I've placed all of my caches on public land, in places were they would do no harm, and where the cacher could safely look without too many muggles. I got permission from the Park Dept, but it would have been virtually impossible to get formal DOT approval for caches safely placed at the edge of the legal right of way. My libertarianism belief is that it is public land and I a member of the public own the land and have a right to use it if I cause no harm. My preference is towards well camo-ed caches that are in plain sight and do not required crawling in bushes.

[+Too Tall John]

I got permission from the Park Dept, but it would have been virtually impossible to get formal DOT approval for caches safely placed at the edge of the legal right of way. My libertarianism belief is that it is public land and I a member of the public own the land and have a right to use it if I cause no harm.

I'm suggesting requiring permission for caches placed on commercial property. This is not public property, it is owned by a company, such as Wal-Mart. You are right when you say

First, obtaining formal legal permission on commercial properties will in most instances be very difficult for legal (liability) reasons. The path of least resistance is to say no.

What you saying is that these companies will likely say "No" to a cache being placed. So, by placing a cache on such land is going against the response you preceved you would get. Doesn't that tell you it's wrong to place it? Just because I'm not holding a sign that says "Don't take my popcorn" doesn't mean you can come take the box of popcorn I'm holding. In fact, if you try, I'm likely to do something about it. While Wal-Mart is probably not going to take action against an individual, it is quite possible they'll come after GC.com.

 

Don't... eat... my... popcorn!

[+geomann1]

Personally, I don't intend to place any caches on commercial properties and I have a very strong preference for searching for caches on public land.

 

However, The popcorn analogy really isn't correct, as that it a case of steeling, not placing a harmless cache in an area open to the public. I stress the word harmless, which brings us back to the common sense concept. I don't see a legal basis for someone going after GC, unless the cache was harmful or dangerous. At worse, a request could be made that a listing be removed.

[+Too Tall John]

Personally, I don't intend to place any caches on commercial properties and I have a very strong preference for searching for caches on public land.

 

However, The popcorn analogy really isn't correct, as that it a case of steeling, not placing a harmless cache in an area open to the public.

By placing a cache on private property (which a parking lot is, no matter how many people park there every day) you are inviting others to enter that property for purposes other than what the landowner intended. This is trespassing. Which is illegal. As is theft, just held at a higher level.

At worse, a request could be made that a listing be removed.

And if Wal-Mart, for example, were to discover how many caches were in their parking lots without permission? You better believe they'll make a stink and get them removed. That's a lot of caches.

[+flask]

 

And if Wal-Mart, for example, were to discover how many caches were in their parking lots without permission? You better believe they'll make a stink and get them removed. That's a lot of caches.

 

i bet they know already. walmart is large and far-reaching and geocaching isn't exactly the secret it once was.

 

if i were wal-mart (which is kind of like saying "if i were the epicenter of evil in the universe")

 

...uh, anyway. if i were wal-mart, i would adopt an attitude of not knowing about it. that way if something shifts and i decide not to allow caches in my parking lots, i can say i just found out about them.

[+wimseyguy]

Ditto what she just said. And don't forget that this company already allows and even encourages traveling caches campers and RV's to spend the night in its parking lots. Perhaps they realize the benefit of being kind to a community of potential customers (unlike how they treat their employees, but I wouldn't dream of attempting to derail this discussion with that tangent.)

[+TrailGators]

Personally, I don't intend to place any caches on commercial properties and I have a very strong preference for searching for caches on public land.

 

However, The popcorn analogy really isn't correct, as that it a case of steeling, not placing a harmless cache in an area open to the public.

By placing a cache on private property (which a parking lot is, no matter how many people park there every day) you are inviting others to enter that property for purposes other than what the landowner intended. This is trespassing. Which is illegal. As is theft, just held at a higher level.

At worse, a request could be made that a listing be removed.

And if Wal-Mart, for example, were to discover how many caches were in their parking lots without permission? You better believe they'll make a stink and get them removed. That's a lot of caches.

I think Wal-Mart executives have bigger fish to fry than worrying about caches in their parking lots. That's probably why, it has never been an issue. However, that doesn't make hiding them in those places without permission right. The guidelines state that you need permission but this is obviously being ignored by many. I guess if you get enough people doing the wrong thing than it somehow becomes OK....

[+ArmandoM]

So, what happened to this

"You are ultimately responsible for the cache so make sure you know the rules for the area where your cache is being placed.

 

Ultimately you'll want to place a cache in a place that is unique in some way. The big reward for geocachers, other than finding the cache itself, is the location. A prime camping spot, great viewpoint, unusual location, etc. are all good places to hide a cache.

 

Note: Please be respectful of the areas you are thinking about placing the cache. For example, if it's the location of the spotted owl, or off-trail with delicate ground cover, keep in mind that others will be walking in these areas."

 

Is anyone following this guidelines?

[+Destitute]

Ooh

 

A warning from the OP

 

I'm not even going to waste my time posting in your threads anymore.

 

promises, promises

[+tozainamboku]

Ooh

 

A warning from the OP

 

I'm not even going to waste my time posting in your threads anymore.

 

promises, promises

Let's refrain from personal attacks. I had started to post earlier that I have PM'd Kit Fox to explain to him the reason for the warning and invite back to this thread, but decided that that was between him and me. Because of your post I am now going ahead with letting everyone know that I have asked Kit Fox to feel free to return to this discussion. I know he has a bookmark list of caches he thinks may have been placed without permission and where you might look suspicious when looking for a cache. So he has given a lot of thought as to what caches could potentially cause problems and has taken personal action to address this. You may not agree with either his assessment of the dangers or the methods he uses to address them. You can discuss that in this thread. The main rule is to not call for banning any particular cache type (LPCs for example) outright since the problems don't apply specifically to LPCs. Also, try not to express a dislike for a particular kind of cache (e.g. by calling them lame) except as it applies to the three problem areas in my original post.

 

Edit to add:

I want to point out that I am not a moderator on this site and cannot ban anyone for violating my rules. I guess I could report this to the moderators but I doubt they would take any action unless you are violating the forum guidelines. So my rules are only a request to try and keep this thread on topic. The 'Should LPCs be Banned' thread shows that staying topic can be hard to accomplish.

Edited March 1, 2007 by tozainamboku

[Clan Riffster]

By placing a cache on private property (which a parking lot is, no matter how many people park there every day) you are inviting others to enter that property for purposes other than what the landowner intended. This is trespassing.

John, I disagree with your definition of trespassing, at least as it is applied to Florida. Other states may vary. Here in the sunshine state, trespassing is defined by Florida statute 810.09.

Trespass on property other than structure or conveyance.--

 

(1)(a) A person who, without being authorized, licensed, or invited, willfully enters upon or remains in any property other than a structure or conveyance:

 

1. As to which notice against entering or remaining is given, either by actual communication to the offender or by posting, fencing, or cultivation as described in s. 810.011; or

 

2. If the property is the unenclosed curtilage of a dwelling and the offender enters or remains with the intent to commit an offense thereon, other than the offense of trespass, commits the offense of trespass on property other than a structure or conveyance.

 

My reasoning against commercial property caches without explicit permission are not due to fear of criminal prosecution, since this could not occur in Florida, but rather, I feel it's only proper to have permission to hide stuff on private property, whether or not I'm allowed to be there.

[+Confucius' Cat]

Anyhow, I don't mess with any caches close to or behind any businesses anymore. I'm not sure why I did in the first place. Anyhow, lack of permission is the number one problem with urbans.

Absolutely correct. I have to wonder just exactly why the cache owner wants to lead me to the store dumpster or the employee's smoking lounge and cigarette butt dump anyway.

 

Even WITH explicit permission, why bother? Without explicit permission- you gotta be nutz!

 

 

As far as permission, I do the same - just yesterday the owner of a building stopped me and two other cachers as we rooted around the electrical panels behind his store. We showed him the cache, told him it was supposed to have hiis permission, when he said it didn't I asked if it could be left in place, he was fine with it - I can't tell you how many times that has happened - at least twenty times over the years.

<snip>

If the cache doesn't have permission, ask for it. If there are muggles about, try to recruit them to play the game!

How will the cache owners ever learn (to ask permission) if the finders keep doing their job for them? Giving a drunk a drink?

[+gh patriot]

Im an lpc enabler...

[+geomann1]

This is an interesting thread.

 

My feelings now are:

 

1) that it is often easier to say you are sorry than to obtain permission.

 

2) It all comes down to how a cache was placed. A cache should be placed so that its presence and finding escapes notice (no harm, no foul).

 

3) Problem caches are due to poorly placed caches not the lack of permission. The hider should be aware that all sorts of people will be looking for caches, and should never place a cache where a type of hide exposes people to risks. A very clever hide (I initially thought) in my area was a fake (unconnected) electical outlet box under a boardwalk near other electrical and telephone boxes. In retrospect it is a bad idea in that encourages people to mess with electrical equipment. I kid you not when I note that my 7 year olds son's first thought at any micro cache sites is to lift up the skirts on any nearby light and flag posts.

 

4) Why bother with CP caches anyways?

[+Kit Fox]

This is an interesting thread.

 

My feelings now are:

 

1) that it is often easier to say you are sorry than to obtain permission.

Try telling that to a judge when you got cited for disturbing the peace, or when the city bills you for the bomb squad's visit to your cache.

 

2) It all comes down to how a cache was placed. A cache should be placed so that its presence and finding escapes notice (no harm, no foul).

 

3) Problem caches are due to poorly placed caches not the lack of permission. The hider should be aware that all sorts of people will be looking for caches, and should never place a cache where a type of hide exposes people to risks. A very clever hide (I initially thought) in my area was a fake (unconnected) electical outlet box under a boardwalk near other electrical and telephone boxes. In retrospect it is a bad idea in that encourages people to mess with electrical equipment. I kid you not when I note that my 7 year olds son's first thought at any micro cache sites is to lift up the skirts on any nearby light and flag posts.

 

4) Why bother with CP caches anyways?

 

This would be great if we lived in a world dominated by common sense. Sadly, many cachers only have enough sense to mark coordinates, and place a 35mm canister. They don't have enough sense to think about the implications, and hassle they cause, when they hide caches in bad spots. They (cache hiders lacking common sense) feign ignorance, when someone gets detained by LE because a cacher was seen tampering with an outlet panel on the back of a strip mall. I could spend all day giving other examples of why CPCs create problems.

Edited March 2, 2007 by Kit Fox

[+Team GeoBlast]

 

And if Wal-Mart, for example, were to discover how many caches were in their parking lots without permission? You better believe they'll make a stink and get them removed. That's a lot of caches.

 

i bet they know already. walmart is large and far-reaching and geocaching isn't exactly the secret it once was.

 

if i were wal-mart (which is kind of like saying "if i were the epicenter of evil in the universe")

 

...uh, anyway. if i were wal-mart, i would adopt an attitude of not knowing about it. that way if something shifts and i decide not to allow caches in my parking lots, i can say i just found out about them.

 

This isn't the first time I've heard it said that maybe Walmart already knows about all the caches on their property. Walmart is not going to have a "don't ask don't tell" rule. It would be above board and we would know about it.

 

I asked this once I think the silence was telling.. has anyone reading this ever obtained permission to put a cache on the property of any Big Box Store? Just one person? Love to hear how that went.

[+geomann1]

"Try telling that to a judge when you got cited for disturbing the peace, or when the city bills you for the bomb squad's visit to your cache."

 

If someone places a cache or searches for a cache in away that draws LE (to the extent of detention) or the bomb squad, then he or she deserves the consequences. It is so unnecessary, and contrary to what geocaching should be all about, which is having wholesome fun.

 

The issue with permission is that it is often more trouble to get, then it is worth just to place a cache. In Lee County, Florida, there is a one page application form to place a cache in a park, which is no big deal. On the contrary, I certainly don't have the time or patience to deal with corporation legal departments just place a cache, when I can put it somewhere else. As was correctly noted by others, placing a cache on unposted land that is open to the public is not a crinimal act. One has to be a total idiot to raise things to the point of legal disturbing the peace.

 

To me, the key is placing a cache so no one notices, and I stand by the "no harm/no foul" doctrine.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

If someone places a cache or searches for a cache in away that draws LE (to the extent of detention) or the bomb squad, then he or she deserves the consequences. It is so unnecessary, and contrary to what geocaching should be all about, which is having wholesome fun.

I think you should do a bit of reading before you cast such a broad (and incorrect) net!

[+Kit Fox]

"Try telling that to a judge when you got cited for disturbing the peace, or when the city bills you for the bomb squad's visit to your cache."

 

If someone places a cache or searches for a cache in away that draws LE (to the extent of detention) or the bomb squad, then he or she deserves the consequences. It is so unnecessary, and contrary to what geocaching should be all about, which is having wholesome fun.

 

Emergency Cache Archival Needed, HELP

 

Read this article before you paint everyone with such a broad brush. The irony of the cache referenced in this thread is that the owner had the nerve to blame the incident on Pres. Bush instead of himself for placing a cache near an airport.

 

I was approached and questioned by Palm Desert's finest, when I looked for a puzzle cache near a building. I was very discreet, it was early in the morning, and the parking lot was empty. What I had not planned for was the silent alarm going off in the building nearby. I explained my actions, showed him my ID, and he let me go.

 

The issue with permission is that it is often more trouble to get, then it is worth just to place a cache. In Lee County, Florida, there is a one page application form to place a cache in a park, which is no big deal. On the contrary, I certainly don't have the time or patience to deal with corporation legal departments just place a cache, when I can put it somewhere else. As was correctly noted by others, placing a cache on unposted land that is open to the public is not a crinimal act. One has to be a total idiot to raise things to the point of legal disturbing the peace.

 

To me, the key is placing a cache so no one notices, and I stand by the "no harm/no foul" doctrine.

 

I think you misunderstood me. Off my 93 cache hides, only a couple are in areas of increased visibility. I take pride in hiding caches where finders don't have to "use stealth," or "watch for muggles."

 

I personally think that no caches in Commercial Parking Lots should be approved, until the reviewer is given sufficient proof of permission, by the cache hider. This would weed out a majority of the conflicts.

Edited March 2, 2007 by Kit Fox

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

I asked this once I think the silence was telling.. has anyone reading this ever obtained permission to put a cache on the property of any Big Box Store? Just one person? Love to hear how that went.

Silence isn't telling - it mostly means that we are tired of the topic.

 

To answer your question, yes, I have obtained permission for several CPCs; at a chain restraunt (Golden Rule), a YMCA (YNot?), a country store (The South Shall Rise Again!) and a fishing camp (Gone Fishin) for mine, see below for other's.

 

For the YMCA the local manager sent me to the distric HQ. I met with them, showed them a stocked ammo box, explained the game and permission was given for an ammo box hide on all of the YMCA properties in this district so long as the manager was shown where it is. At least three other cachers now have hides at different YMCAs.

 

I don't hide many micros, one outside a cemetary (Rambler's Only Micro (well, that was the plan when I named it!)) and one at the aforementioned country store, and have the owner's permission for both, but I do hunt a lot of them. Mostly I hide sportsmans dry boxes, which are simular to an ammo can.

 

In my history of hunting urban caches I have several times been asked my business at big-box stores.

 

It wasn't a big-box, per se, but it just happened an hour ago! A dozen local cachers met for lunch today and afterward hunted, en masse, a cache at a Shell Convenience Store (a major chain) across the street from the restraunt (FUBAR Foshizzle). The cache owner was with us. After perhaps ten minutes of ten of us looking all over her vacuum cleaner and an adjacent phone pole the manager and an employee came out. She recognized the cache owner and told us that she had given him permission for the hide two weeks ago. We told her about the game, showed her the hide, and she was delighted; said she and her employees enjoyed watching people hunt for it and got this address so she could come here and read the logs!

 

Before that was two nights ago here in Birmingham Alabama. Three of us were hunting a micro on the electrical panels behind a major food store, the anchor store of a perhaps 20-store mall, and one of a chain of several hundred stores. I think that qualifies as a big-box. I explained the game and showed them the hide. I told them hides normally had permission from the management. He stated that he was the management, thought the game interesting, and when I asked if it could be left in place he said fine, no problem.

 

Time before that, a keyholder on a downspout on a Toys-R-Us in a huge mall in Pennsylvania. While hunting it about 10 p.m. an employee spotted us, told her manager, who called the cops, who said don't worry about it, there's a patrol car across the street watching them! Two cruisers roll up and the manager comes out. We explain the game, show them the cache, show them the cache page, and I tell them "We normally require this kind of hide to have permission, I am sorry the hider didn't ask you, but now that you know what it is will you allow it to stay here?" and he agreed to do so. The cops call their dispatchers and tell them several geocachers will be poking around town that night and all weekend, and we were left alone for the weekend (~60 folks in town for a caching event the next morning).

 

Twice the managers of different Shoney's Restraunts (once here and once in Tennessee) where we hosted a M&G have listened to our stories and ASKED US to place a cache outside their window where they could watch cachers hunt it!

 

There's one here, with management's permission (I have met him and know for sure he allows it), outside a strip-mall national-chain eyeglass retailer (Can You See Me Now?), on a sign in the bushes right in front of the store, where employees will gather inside the window to watch and laugh at cachers hunting it.

 

Exactly to the point - While caching with a group we found one that's hidden under the tail of a kids rocking-horse machine immediately outside the door of a WalMart in Jacksonville Florida - must have been found hundreds of times at GW4 and it is still in place. We were there forever because everyone had to have a picture of themselves reaching up this horse's butt. The store manger came out, asked what was up, the game was explained and he went away happy. I do not know if the hider asked permission, presumably not or the manager wouldn't have asked us what we were dong. I do not remember if we expressly asked him for permission to leave it there, but he certainly made no objection.

 

I could go on, but you get the point.

 

Interestingly, I have NEVER been asked what I was up to for an LPC! Only when it was actually attached to the building, and rarely then, and I have lifted skirts all over this country!

 

So yes, you can ask for and receive permission from store management no matter how big or small the chain.

 

That's why they are managers - they have the discretion and authority to manage their stores!

 

Oh! Almost forgot - I do have another, a plastic tube in a hole in the rock wall in the parking lot of a convenience store (a chain store)! I have had three management changes at this one, it's been found dozens of times (Lair of the Wombat) and each new manager has allowed it. The last time I checked on it there was a new manager, but the old manager had told him about it!

 

Loosely paraphrasing a quote I heard years ago "There are no lasting problems, just solutions you have yet to find!"

[+Confucius' Cat]

I personally think that no caches in Commercial Parking Lots should be approved, until the reviewer is given sufficient proof of permission, by the cache hider. This would weed out a majority of the conflicts.

I'm absolutely with you on that.

I don't think it is too much to ask that cache hiders get specific permission- either written or verbal WITH A NAME of the person granting when a cache is being placed on PRIVATE PROPERTY even though the property is open to the public.

 

There does not have to be a blanket permission policy. There are places where assumed permission is more than adequate, but Commercial Property is simply NOT one of those places.

[Clan Riffster]

I asked this once I think the silence was telling.. has anyone reading this ever obtained permission to put a cache on the property of any Big Box Store? Just one person? Love to hear how that went.

I thought I answered that one already. Maybe it was a different thread? They say the mind is the first thing to go.

Our Lay Mass Micro is hidden in a Winn Dixie parking lot, with the permission of the store manager. He thought the idea was neat. The Winn Dixie has since closed down, and I've let the cache stay there pending someone else opening another store there. I'll ask again, once it reopens. If the new owners tell me "No", the cache will be pulled.

[Clan Riffster]

I don't think it is too much to ask that cache hiders get specific permission- either written or verbal WITH A NAME of the person granting when a cache is being placed on PRIVATE PROPERTY even though the property is open to the public.

An added benefit to this idea is that, in the unlikely event that a cacher was stopped by "The Fuzz", the name of the person who invited the activity, AKA: Store Manager who gave permission), would nuke any probable cause said officer might have for arresting said cacher. It's hard to trespass when you've been invited.

[+Team GeoBlast]

I asked this once I think the silence was telling.. has anyone reading this ever obtained permission to put a cache on the property of any Big Box Store? Just one person? Love to hear how that went.

Silence isn't telling - it mostly means that we are tired of the topic.

I could go on, but you get the point.

 

Man.. you certainly don't sound like any part of the problem, that is for sure. You did, however, miss my point completely. I asked specifically about Big Box Stores because they are much different than the places you have approached. You were able reach and consult with the person that has the explicit right to give you permission to hide a cache there. It's different at Big Box Stores.. even in your horsie example at Walmart. The store manager obviously didn't know that the cache was there so that goes in the category of probably every Walmart out there. This is a huge corporation with very deep pockets. They are a much different animal than what you describe and one that we should be wary.

[+Tahoein' Bunch]

 

I admit that it isn't a lamp post skirt, but the same principle applies, and if one guy thought of it, I guarantee that somebody else is using a similar scheme.

 

I don't know a darned thing about the drug trade, but that thought has occurred to me - I've seen stuff on TV where people pick up and drop off stuff... I've often wondered it finding a cache in an urban setting could be misinterpreted by somebody as something like that.

 

Of course if the bystander investigated what was "dropped" they'd find nothing but some kiddie trading items etc

 

But it is a valid concern, IMO.

 

Jenn

 

My Boss is also a Farmer (raisins) and near his property is a big ponding basin and the Sheriff has told him to look out for people in the area because there are alot of Drug Drops and pickups there not to approache them just get Lic #s and vehicle Descriptions.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

self-edit before a mod does. It's late, what can I say!

Edited March 3, 2007 by TheAlabamaRambler

[Mushtang]

I asked this once I think the silence was telling.. has anyone reading this ever obtained permission to put a cache on the property of any Big Box Store? Just one person? Love to hear how that went.

Silence isn't telling - it mostly means that we are tired of the topic.

I could go on, but you get the point.

 

Man.. you certainly don't sound like any part of the problem, that is for sure. You did, however, miss my point completely. I asked specifically about Big Box Stores because they are much different than the places you have approached. You were able reach and consult with the person that has the explicit right to give you permission to hide a cache there. It's different at Big Box Stores.. even in your horsie example at Walmart. The store manager obviously didn't know that the cache was there so that goes in the category of probably every Walmart out there. This is a huge corporation with very deep pockets. They are a much different animal than what you describe and one that we should be wary.

You'll have to clearly define what you consider to be a "Big Box Store". Two people have now given you examples, one of which was given before you claimed that the "silence was telling".

[+JimmyEv]

By the number of people I'm accosted by every time I leave a Walmart store (Girl Scouts, Boy Scouts, cheerleaders, football teams, a church's bake sale...) I'd be surprised if Walmart every said no to any one using their property. I don't think those are 'problem' caches.

 

I also don't think that caches are problems based upon muggles' perceptions of what they are. Any cache -- urban, rural, ammo box, tupperware -- placed with or without permission -- can cause a ruckus based upon someone's perception of the cache (drug stash? bomb?). And it's not just caches. Any thing can cause this, from light brites to the vast amounts of litter alongside the road to actual caches (just wait until someone realizes that a bomb might be hidden in that plastic shopping bag laying there, or, worse yet, in that beer can tossed on the side of that highway bridge. Life in New England would come to a grinding halt). There is no way to control what others might think.

 

What I think are problem caches are ones that are hidden in a unique way, then imitated in a non-unique way. For example, the first sprinkler cache I did was hidden in a wetland. Every sprinkler cache I've done since then (which I assume was based on that first one in the area) is in a flower bed. Clearly the sprinkler in the wetland didn't belong -- but a sprinkler in a flower bed? How unusual is that?

 

Same thing with electrical caches. The first ones I did you could blatantly tell that they weren't part of the electrical equipment of the facility. But then people started hiding them in a way that you couldn't differentiate between real electrical equipment and fake. These do have the potential to cause problems.

[+mikeslomka]

(just wait until someone realizes that a bomb might be hidden in that plastic shopping bag laying there, or, worse yet, in that beer can tossed on the side of that highway bridge. Life in New England would come to a grinding halt).

 

I once helped to close down a large chain big box electonics store for 3 hours because somebody called in a suspicious bag in the parking lot. By the time it was over, Michigan State Police bomb squad had x-rayed somebodies laundry and the store had lost quite a bit of income.

[+Criminal]

Really, someone could place one of these inside the mall and instead of running away, people would gather around it waiting for the candy to pop out.

 

Edited March 7, 2007 by Criminal

[+Team GeoBlast]

I asked this once I think the silence was telling.. has anyone reading this ever obtained permission to put a cache on the property of any Big Box Store? Just one person? Love to hear how that went.

Silence isn't telling - it mostly means that we are tired of the topic.

I could go on, but you get the point.

 

Man.. you certainly don't sound like any part of the problem, that is for sure. You did, however, miss my point completely. I asked specifically about Big Box Stores because they are much different than the places you have approached. You were able reach and consult with the person that has the explicit right to give you permission to hide a cache there. It's different at Big Box Stores.. even in your horsie example at Walmart. The store manager obviously didn't know that the cache was there so that goes in the category of probably every Walmart out there. This is a huge corporation with very deep pockets. They are a much different animal than what you describe and one that we should be wary.

You'll have to clearly define what you consider to be a "Big Box Store". Two people have now given you examples, one of which was given before you claimed that the "silence was telling".

 

Perhaps I should stay with commercial properties instead of being so specific. It's good that there are a few examples out there but can you honestly say that these are even close to the norm? Would say that half of them are legal?

[Mushtang]

I asked this once I think the silence was telling.. has anyone reading this ever obtained permission to put a cache on the property of any Big Box Store? Just one person? Love to hear how that went.

Silence isn't telling - it mostly means that we are tired of the topic.

I could go on, but you get the point.

 

Man.. you certainly don't sound like any part of the problem, that is for sure. You did, however, miss my point completely. I asked specifically about Big Box Stores because they are much different than the places you have approached. You were able reach and consult with the person that has the explicit right to give you permission to hide a cache there. It's different at Big Box Stores.. even in your horsie example at Walmart. The store manager obviously didn't know that the cache was there so that goes in the category of probably every Walmart out there. This is a huge corporation with very deep pockets. They are a much different animal than what you describe and one that we should be wary.

You'll have to clearly define what you consider to be a "Big Box Store". Two people have now given you examples, one of which was given before you claimed that the "silence was telling".

 

Perhaps I should stay with commercial properties instead of being so specific. It's good that there are a few examples out there but can you honestly say that these are even close to the norm? Would say that half of them are legal?

I'd say that 100% of them have adequate permission (according to the cache owners) or they wouldn't have been listed.

[+Team GeoBlast]

I asked this once I think the silence was telling.. has anyone reading this ever obtained permission to put a cache on the property of any Big Box Store? Just one person? Love to hear how that went.

Silence isn't telling - it mostly means that we are tired of the topic.

I could go on, but you get the point.

 

Man.. you certainly don't sound like any part of the problem, that is for sure. You did, however, miss my point completely. I asked specifically about Big Box Stores because they are much different than the places you have approached. You were able reach and consult with the person that has the explicit right to give you permission to hide a cache there. It's different at Big Box Stores.. even in your horsie example at Walmart. The store manager obviously didn't know that the cache was there so that goes in the category of probably every Walmart out there. This is a huge corporation with very deep pockets. They are a much different animal than what you describe and one that we should be wary.

You'll have to clearly define what you consider to be a "Big Box Store". Two people have now given you examples, one of which was given before you claimed that the "silence was telling".

 

Perhaps I should stay with commercial properties instead of being so specific. It's good that there are a few examples out there but can you honestly say that these are even close to the norm? Would say that half of them are legal?

I'd say that 100% of them have adequate permission (according to the cache owners) or they wouldn't have been listed.

 

If cache owner says it is so then it is taken as verbatim by the GC.com reviewer in most cases. I know from prior discourse with you that you don't see any harm in this and I see it as causing huge problems down the road with commercial property owners. I am not sure we are going to move past this point in the conversation because we don't see eye to eye on this issue.

 

So, why not agree to mutually move on? I am certainly willing to admit that there's nothing further productive that can be come from debating this issue with you.

[Mushtang]

I asked this once I think the silence was telling.. has anyone reading this ever obtained permission to put a cache on the property of any Big Box Store? Just one person? Love to hear how that went.

Silence isn't telling - it mostly means that we are tired of the topic.

I could go on, but you get the point.

 

Man.. you certainly don't sound like any part of the problem, that is for sure. You did, however, miss my point completely. I asked specifically about Big Box Stores because they are much different than the places you have approached. You were able reach and consult with the person that has the explicit right to give you permission to hide a cache there. It's different at Big Box Stores.. even in your horsie example at Walmart. The store manager obviously didn't know that the cache was there so that goes in the category of probably every Walmart out there. This is a huge corporation with very deep pockets. They are a much different animal than what you describe and one that we should be wary.

You'll have to clearly define what you consider to be a "Big Box Store". Two people have now given you examples, one of which was given before you claimed that the "silence was telling".

 

Perhaps I should stay with commercial properties instead of being so specific. It's good that there are a few examples out there but can you honestly say that these are even close to the norm? Would say that half of them are legal?

I'd say that 100% of them have adequate permission (according to the cache owners) or they wouldn't have been listed.

 

If cache owner says it is so then it is taken as verbatim by the GC.com reviewer in most cases. I know from prior discourse with you that you don't see any harm in this and I see it as causing huge problems down the road with commercial property owners. I am not sure we are going to move past this point in the conversation because we don't see eye to eye on this issue.

 

So, why not agree to mutually move on? I am certainly willing to admit that there's nothing further productive that can be come from debating this issue with you.

I have no problem if you don't want to be argumentative any longer.

 

I'm not targeting anybody, but when someone says something that I disagree with, or when I see someone jump to an illogical conclusion and use it to try and put something they don't enjoy in a bad light, or when someone uses an obvious Straw Man to try and conclude that something I enjoy is a "bad" thing, I'm going to continue to speak up.