Cachers getting a bad rep

[+coureur de bois]

Seems like cachers are getting a bad rep and starting to get blamed for vandalizism that is probably being done by some of the youth in our community. We recently had a cache dissabled here because of this and also because of an overzealous security guard. Probably his first time doing security work, and it went to his head. Check out this listing: GCW1Y6, and read the latest posts, both by the owner of the cache, the security gaurd, and other cachers in the area. Me and the wife were at this cache several months ago. It was a neat cache that you accessed by taking one of those glass elevators to the top. We had never been in one, and didn't even know it existed in town! We had always wanted to ride in one, and that was our chance. It really made the cache worth visiting!! I'll admit things should have been done a little differently, but I think that the security guard got way out of line here. It's too bad that some things are coming to this. Please let us know what you think of this situation. Has anything like this happened in your area?

[+AndrewRJ]

Thats hillarious, the guy in a backhanded manner accuses us of damaging the elevator, but then claims that the area is on the camera. If its on the camera then he had better have proof before making an acusation like that.

 

Maybe not the best spot with someone who apparently can't even read the time caviot on his own no tresspassing sign. Just replace it in a nearby spot.

 

To answer your question, Out here in Washington I really havn't heard of cases where cachers in general are accused of damage, but there have been cases where areas deteriorate, and you kinda have to wonder when they are areas in the woods.

 

I really think that we do a good job of policeing ourselves and making sure not to damage areas.

[+TotemLake]

The S/O (Security Officer) was doing his job otherwise he gets fired for ignoring his client's requirements. Also, he merely indicated in his posts the damage may or may not have been caused by geocachers, but it was something he has to consider as part of his job. It wasn't an accusation. The wording is very careful. It is an observation to a possibility that may or may not be germane to the objective. You might want to consider the elevators mentioned may not have cameras inside them. That's where the damage seems to be at. Let's also consider the private property aspect. Was permission gained? I didn't see anything in the cache description saying it was.

 

Now, why is it all of a sudden a problem? Consider on-going damage is happening in the general location of the cache that may or may not be related to the cache. The client is having to pay for the repairs, which frankly is expensive to have a qualified and certified elevator engineer come out and look the system over. The S/O's parent office is probably advised by his client his job is on the line because the damage is happening on his watch. Frankly, if it was my paycheck versus your game, your game loses. You're on private property, please leave. You refuse. The S/O is obligated by his client's contract to call the police and call you persona non grata.

 

I've been on that other side of the fence. The perspective towards a contract security trying to do their job is 2-dimensional. You put their job at risk and call them over zealous.

Edited March 2, 2007 by TotemLake

[+Shop99er]

The guard said there had been vandalism before. He did not say it was caused by cachers. As to the matter of the light and switch panels being moved, he also states that it may or may not have been caused by cachers. Nowhere does he flat-out say that a cacher had done the damage.

 

He also points out that no permisson was asked. This cache was on private property. Like it or not, the cache owner is in the wrong. With no permission asked or given, the guard was doing the correct thing by removing the cache.

 

He should have e-mailed the owner as soon as possible after removing it. But he isn't under any sort of requirement to do so.

 

How would you like it if someone hid a cache on your property, without bothering to ask if it's ok?

 

Maybe the cache owner should take a closer look at the guidelines regarding permission to place a cache on private property.

 

The guard was doing the job he was hired to do. That is, protect private property. Deal with it, and quit assuming that you have a "right" to put a cache anywhere you want.

 

As to damage in Washington State, I can show you where cachers destroyed plant life so thouroughly that it may never recover.

[+coureur de bois]

I will have to go back and check this one out. If I remember correctly, this is a public parking garage. When we were there, I don't remember ever seeing a No Trespassing sign, just that it was open only from 6:00 am to 8:00pm. There was nobody in the booth, and we never seen anyone either. Like it was stated, this cache has been there for some time, it seems odd that now all of a sudden, it seems to be an issue. I think the S/O is on some kind of power trip.

Edited March 3, 2007 by coureur de bois

[+TotemLake]

I will have to go back and check this one out. If I remember correctly, this is a public parking garage. When we were there, I don't remember ever seeing a No Trespassing sign, just that it was open only from 6:00 am to 8:00pm. There was nobody in the booth, and we never seen anyone either. Like it was stated, this cache has been there for some time, it seems odd that now all of a sudden, it seems to be an issue. I think the S/O is on some kind of power trip.

There is no such thing as a public garage in the sense that the public can go and do anything they want. It is owned by somebody or some entity and there will be a point where if your business in the garage does not involve a car parked in it or being parked in it, then you can be declared trespassing.

[+coureur de bois]

I will have to go back and check this one out. If I remember correctly, this is a public parking garage. When we were there, I don't remember ever seeing a No Trespassing sign, just that it was open only from 6:00 am to 8:00pm. There was nobody in the booth, and we never seen anyone either. Like it was stated, this cache has been there for some time, it seems odd that now all of a sudden, it seems to be an issue. I think the S/O is on some kind of power trip.

There is no such thing as a public garage in the sense that the public can go and do anything they want. It is owned by somebody or some entity and there will be a point where if your business in the garage does not involve a car parked in it or being parked in it, then you can be declared trespassing.

Oops! I didn't know that. I grew up and spent the first 25 years on farm in the middle of no where. I'm still learning things about big cities. What if you drove your car into the garage and parked, got the cache and left? Could that work? I'm just curious.

[+TotemLake]

I will have to go back and check this one out. If I remember correctly, this is a public parking garage. When we were there, I don't remember ever seeing a No Trespassing sign, just that it was open only from 6:00 am to 8:00pm. There was nobody in the booth, and we never seen anyone either. Like it was stated, this cache has been there for some time, it seems odd that now all of a sudden, it seems to be an issue. I think the S/O is on some kind of power trip.

There is no such thing as a public garage in the sense that the public can go and do anything they want. It is owned by somebody or some entity and there will be a point where if your business in the garage does not involve a car parked in it or being parked in it, then you can be declared trespassing.

Oops! I didn't know that. I grew up and spent the first 25 years on farm in the middle of no where. I'm still learning things about big cities. What if you drove your car into the garage and parked, got the cache and left? Could that work? I'm just curious.

Nobody I know kicks a paying customer out of the store unless the customer is obnoxious.

[+BFPierce]

I completely support the security guard on this one.. His not is well and carefully worded, and very non-offensive. He's just a person doing his job, and honestly, I don't think he should HAVE to take the time to decipher a cacher from a prowler or vandal.

[+ironman114]

If some of you posters on this topic and those posting notes on the cache page would read carefully, you would see that the security officer DID NOT take the cache. The last person to log a find Jet 20, said they will send an email about returning the log. The S/O told them not to replace it.

Edited March 3, 2007 by ironman114

[+Renegade Knight]

As a rule I would not ask security for permission to place the cache. I'd ask the land owner or manager. Then knowing securty would need to know about the cache I'd fill them in.

 

The permission issue isn't clear. The guard only states that security wasn't asked. However as stated they are not the ones to ask. They just need to know what was decided. The guard who posted has a brain. Odds are they would be easy to talk to about this.

 

As for potential damage, I'd have to see the cache location etc.

Edited March 3, 2007 by Renegade Knight

[+ironman114]

After some time to reflect on this situation here is what I think.

 

Instead of complaining about a security guard being over zealous, how about reading his posts more carefully.

 

It seems he thinks geocaching "is a great sport" to directly quote his post. He also seemed to hint that he didn't think that it should be totally banned in the parking garage but that something could have been worked out. Hence his statement,

 

Now, on a lighter note, if one were to have ASKED US to place a cache there, and made sure to mention something still somewhat cryptic, like "stop at booth for permission to access" It would have been cool.

 

He has done some research on his own is seen by the fact that he is aware of the geocachers creed and rule #3 stating to respect property rights (like leaving when asked to by a security guard) and seek permission.

 

In his second note he states

 

BTW, with a little more care to the posting and placement of this cache (to avoid this sad ending), I have to agree, great spot to cache.

 

It seems to me that in both of his notes he shows he likes the sport and has nothing against a cache being there as long as permission was asked and a note placed on the cache page to

"stop at booth for permission to access"

 

 

Perhaps if the cache owner were to meet and talk with him they might get the blessing to replace the cache. If they don't want to or have time to meet in person he can be contacted by email thru his profile page. This might do much to shed a better light on the sport.

[+Uplink]

Sounded to me like the Security Guard had a pretty good attitude, and legitimate concerns.

Edited March 4, 2007 by Uplink

[+Uplink]

Edited March 4, 2007 by Uplink

[+TotemLake]

Well looking over the previous notes on the cache page, the cachers are definitely giving themselves a bad reputation.

[+Elde]

As to damage in Washington State, I can show you where cachers destroyed plant life so thouroughly that it may never recover.

 

Indeed, as I have pointed out before - if geocachers were so careful about not doing any damage... why do we have the word 'geotrail' in our lexicon?

 

The third post by the security gaurd is really disheartening.

[+pdxmarathonman]

The third post by the security gaurd is really disheartening.

Disheartening, and completely understandable.

 

A little more time spent reflecting and a little less time spent flaming would have certainly been appropriate.

[+Seattle Seekers]

Well, I can see this from both points of view. I am a Security Officer (Site Supervisor) myself so I know a bit about where he's coming from. However, I have to take the jet20's most recent post in mind as well. Here's my take on both sides.

 

I think that had zap handled it the way he claims he did, then I'd have to take his side. He is their to enfore the policies layed down by the client and if he advises somebody that they are trespassing and they refuse to leave, then he would be in violation of his companies policies by not calling the police.

 

However.... Based on the statements made by jet20, I have to disagree with him in the way that he handled it. The geocacher's he incountered claim he was "very rude arrogant, verbally abusive and threatening completely outta line and unnecessary". Just because S/O's are enforcing the policies, does not mean they have to be rude and abusive. In fact, that is entirely counter productive.

 

Another quote in jet20's post was... "HE wasn't asked permission to place it there so HE could control the situation ( I don't buy his "ask us" rhetoric for a second, like "us" i.e. him, has power to give that permission) Had he that power and being the sweet kind guy he was he woulda said oh I'm a cacher to I know how it is sure go ahead and keep it there and I will watch out for it while I'm on duty" Security Officers almost never have the authority to over-ride a clients policy regarding trespassing. He would not have had the authority to give permission for the cache to be placed.