Cache in top of Tree

[+PhantomTech]

Recently I went to a cache that was about 60 feet up in a large pine tree. I was able to see the cache from the ground. I wasn't dressed appropriately to attempt to retrieve the cache. Long pants and gloves would be nice. Maybe I just chickened out and didn’t want to risk my life.

 

My question is about liability. I understand if I make the choice to climb 60 feet up a tree I would assume some of the liability.

 

Who could be held liable if an accident occurred while climbing a tree? Land Owner, Cache Owner, or person climbing the tree.

 

Are there any rules about placing a cache in a dangerous situation? Maybe I am overreacting because I just chickened out of climbing a tree. Some people could define a guard rail cache on a busy street dangerous.

[+StarBrand]

See this topic from today:

 

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=168699

 

Probably answers most of that....

[+Miragee]

What was the Terrain rating for the cache? If it was appropriately-rated, then a cacher should know ahead of time what they might be in for.

 

On every cache page, there is a link to this disclaimer.

Geocaching Disclaimer

 

Geocaching.com is owned and operated by Groundspeak Inc. Information in the Geocaching.com database is updated regularly. Neither Groundspeak Inc., nor any agent, officer, employee or volunteer administrator of Groundspeak Inc. warrants the accuracy, reliability, or timeliness of any information and shall not be liable for any losses caused by such reliance on the accuracy, reliability, or timeliness of such information. While every effort is made to ensure the accuracy of this information, portions may be incorrect or not current. Any person or entity that relies on information obtained from Geocaching.com does so at his or her own risk.

 

Geocaching, hiking, backpacking and other outdoor activities involve risk to both persons and property. There are many variables including, but not limited to, weather, fitness level, terrain features and outdoor experience, that must be considered prior to seeking or placing a Cache. Be prepared for your journey and be sure to check the current weather and conditions before heading outdoors. Always exercise common sense and caution.

 

In no way shall Groundspeak Inc. nor any agent, officer, employee or volunteer administrator of Groundspeak Inc., be liable for any direct, indirect, punitive, or consequential damages arising out of, or in any way connected with the use of this website or use of the information contained within.

 

Cache seekers assume all risks involved in seeking a cache.

If you choose to climb the tree, you are accepting the risk given to you by that cache hider.

 

It sounds like a fun cache . . . but I'm not sure I would make it up the entire 60'. That's a pretty tall tree . . .

[+Team_CSG]

I hope it has a 5 terrain rating.

 

As for me, I would pass. Afraid of hights

[+Knight2000]

A cache that is dangerous to attempt to retrieve.

[+Kit Fox]

I recently placed a cache in a tree: Tactical Adventure 1 (Tree-o-cache)

 

I made very clear my warning on the cache page. My cache is appropriately rated as a 5 * terrain, and I even post pictures of me using the correct gear.

 

Safety Issues

 

Tree climbing gear is essential to accessing this cache. Simply climbing the tree "the old fashioned way," will not cut it.

 

The cache is hidden over 50 feet above the ground!

A fall from this high will kill you!

Nobody is forcing you to seek this cache!

This cache is not "for everybody."

You assume all risks in hunting this cache.

Edited July 18, 2007 by Kit Fox

[+Kit Fox]

A cache that is dangerous to attempt to retrieve.

 

You could be bit by a poisonous snake hiking to a cache, and you have a far greater chance of being killed in a car wreck, than attempting a dangerous cache.

[+Knight2000]

A cache that is dangerous to attempt to retrieve.

 

You could be bit by a poisonous snake hiking to a cache, and you have a far greater chance of being killed in a car wreck, than attempting a dangerous cache.

I am not against dangerous caches at all.

 

I just hate it when people throw that creed at you which says something about not endangering others.

[nobby.nobbs]

the trouble is that these days people are too busy looking for the person to blame for things.

 

sorry don't mean a personal attack on the OP but why ask the question? unless the placer has sawn half way through the trunk or booby trapped the route up in some way then how could it be anyone's fault other than your own if you hurt yourself?

 

the only problem lies with the fact that people will try to take you to court, lose the case but in the process cost you to defend yourself.

 

if you don't feel comfortable trying something, anything from country dancing to swimming with sharks then don't do it.

[+briansnat]

I hope it has a 5 terrain rating.

 

As for me, I would pass. Afraid of hights

 

5 stars for climbing a pine tree? Climbing Mt McKinley maybe, but not a pine tree. My tree cache is rated 3 stars for terrain and so is the one owned by another local cacher.

[+Knight2000]

unless the placer has sawn half way through the trunk or booby trapped the route up in some way then how could it be anyone's fault other than your own if you hurt yourself?

The U.S.A. is a crazy place.

 

People will sue for any reason. Logical or not.

[+Kit Fox]

I hope it has a 5 terrain rating.

 

As for me, I would pass. Afraid of hights

 

5 stars for climbing a pine tree? Climbing Mt McKinley maybe, but not a pine tree. My tree cache is rated 3 stars for terrain and so is the one owned by another local cacher.

 

Tree spikes or climbing ropes sure seems like "special equipment" to me, just as the "smiley value" for a cache on top of Everest is exactly the same as a cache hidden underneath a lamp post cover

[+Team Crime Scene]

“I understand if I make the choice to climb 60 feet up a tree I would assume some of the liability.”

 

Some???

 

I’m using kindergarten rules. If you can’t say anything nice don’t say it at all

 

First thing we do is get rid of all the lawyers......

[+Knight2000]

First thing we do is get rid of all the lawyers......

I think some of our fellow cachers are lawyers.

[+McPhan]

99% of lawyers give the other 1% a bad name.

 

(73% of stats are made up)

[+Tsmola]

I hope it has a 5 terrain rating.

 

As for me, I would pass. Afraid of hights

 

5 stars for climbing a pine tree? Climbing Mt McKinley maybe, but not a pine tree. My tree cache is rated 3 stars for terrain and so is the one owned by another local cacher.

 

Tree spikes or climbing ropes sure seems like "special equipment" to me, just as the "smiley value" for a cache on top of Everest is exactly the same as a cache hidden underneath a lamp post cover

 

he never said tree spikes or climbing rope were needed.

 

I have one about 15 ft up a half-dead tree that's rated a 4 because of a short hike to it in addition to the climb I didn't use any special equipment to place it, just climbed right up!

 

It is clearly labeled with a dangerous area icon and warning. I've had 2 or 3 cachers who got to it, saw the cache and declined to climb.

[+Harry Dolphin]

Hmm... There's a 5* tree-climbing cache on my Ten-Mile List. Brian's tree-climbing cache is a 3*. Even this dolphin had no problems with that one. This other one is 45' up a tree with no branches. It definitely requires special equipment.

Photo of 2nd to find.

5 finds 2 DNFs and 23 notes. (Including my suggestion that a chain saw might be the right answer.)

As one local cache posted:

I seeked

I found

I did not conquer

I don't even have a clue as to how to get it,I thought I had the proper equipment with me to make this a one shot deal.

THIS IS THE MOST DANGEROUS CACHE I HAVE SEEN.

I still feel young.....BUT NOT THAT YOUNG

I am stupid.....BUT NOT THAT STUPID

 

But, the question is liability. If you're stupid enough to attempt this cache without the proper equipment, and hurt yourself, you can sue everyone in sight. And lawyers' fees are expensive. I doubt that anyone can protect us from lawyers' fees.

[CoyoteRed]

I just hate it when people throw that creed at you which says something about not endangering others.

Oh, really? Please explain.

[CoyoteRed]

Who could be held liable if an accident occurred while climbing a tree? Land Owner, Cache Owner, or person climbing the tree.

I would think the person climbing the tree. It's not as if he didn't know he was climbing the tree and therefore didn't make a conscious effort to climb said tree. I would think when one looks at a tree, examines his inner self for appropriate skill, and knowingly makes an effort to climb the tree, he is taking on 100% of the responsibility of his actions.

 

I doubt attractive nuisance statues would come in play as I believe all of them refer to children and potentially dangerous objects that children would not know to stay away from.

 

I also think in most states the recreational use statues would come into play as was previously mentioned.

 

Now, if the tree was rotten and the climber couldn't tell, yet the land owner and cache placer knew...

[Clan Riffster]

One of my caches is an ammo can 30' straight up a palm tree. I used the D/T generator to come up with the 4/5 rating, answering the questions as if I, with my level of experience and physical skill, were the one trying to retrieve it. I know there are folks that are capable of shooting up a vertical trunk with no branches, but I ain't one of them. I had to use my climbing tree stand to get there, which bumped it up to a 5.

[+monsterbox]

Hi!

 

Recently I went to a cache that was about 60 feet up in a large pine tree. I was able to see the cache from the ground. I wasn't dressed appropriately to attempt to retrieve the cache. Long pants and gloves would be nice. Maybe I just chickened out and didn’t want to risk my life.

 

My question is about liability. I understand if I make the choice to climb 60 feet up a tree I would assume some of the liability.

 

Who could be held liable if an accident occurred while climbing a tree? Land Owner, Cache Owner, or person climbing the tree.

 

Are there any rules about placing a cache in a dangerous situation? Maybe I am overreacting because I just chickened out of climbing a tree. Some people could define a guard rail cache on a busy street dangerous.

 

This question can only come from an American :-) People here in Europe would just laugh about such a question (and so I do, by the way, sorry ;-).

 

YOU are the one to decide. YOU are the one to climb the tree or to just go home and log a DNF. So why should any other person should be responsible if YOU decide to climb and fail (or better FALL). Was there anyone standing there with a gun to get you climbing the tree? If so, blame him. If not just blame yourself...

 

Sorry, if my answer is not what you've expected but again: We over here can only laugh about blaming others for personal fails.

 

Bye,

Christian

[+TrailGators]

Hi!

 

Recently I went to a cache that was about 60 feet up in a large pine tree. I was able to see the cache from the ground. I wasn't dressed appropriately to attempt to retrieve the cache. Long pants and gloves would be nice. Maybe I just chickened out and didn't want to risk my life.

 

My question is about liability. I understand if I make the choice to climb 60 feet up a tree I would assume some of the liability.

 

Who could be held liable if an accident occurred while climbing a tree? Land Owner, Cache Owner, or person climbing the tree.

 

Are there any rules about placing a cache in a dangerous situation? Maybe I am overreacting because I just chickened out of climbing a tree. Some people could define a guard rail cache on a busy street dangerous.

 

This question can only come from an American :-) People here in Europe would just laugh about such a question (and so I do, by the way, sorry ;-).

 

YOU are the one to decide. YOU are the one to climb the tree or to just go home and log a DNF. So why should any other person should be responsible if YOU decide to climb and fail (or better FALL). Was there anyone standing there with a gun to get you climbing the tree? If so, blame him. If not just blame yourself...

 

Sorry, if my answer is not what you've expected but again: We over here can only laugh about blaming others for personal fails.

 

Bye,

Christian

I'm American and I agree with you. It seems like a simple choice and the consequences of screwing up are obvious as well.

[+team moxiepup]

To me, the liability lies with the finder. Nobody is forcing anyone to climb, it is a matter of choice. Plus with all the disclaimers on cache pages, people should know only they are responsible for their own actions. I do think it would be prudent for the cache page to mention at least a hint of what the search entails though.

 

Keep in mind, landowners may have their own ideas as to who is liable. When we were just starting out, getting ready to place our first cache, I tried to call the Portland Parks to get permission to place caches. It took a few calls to find someone familiar with geocaching! They said we could place caches anywhere in Portland Parks... as long as it wasn't up in a tree! Evidently one of the early area caches in the area was up a tree, Monkey See, Monkey Do and someone fell out of it while attempting to get the cache, and then threatened a lawsuit against the city.

 

Common sense would say the cacher is responsible... but since when did insurance companies ever make sense?

[+Right Wing Wacko]

Let me dive a scenario that happened to me.

 

I was injured while at an event some time ago (Non-Geocaching). Sueing the event sponsors didn't even cross my mind.

 

I went to the Doctor and turned the bill into my medical insurance. It was the Medical insurance company that did an investigation, and decided all without even asking me that they were going to attempt to recover their costs from the property owner where the event took place.

 

I never did hear the final outcome, but when lawyers get involved it's never pretty.

[+sbell111]

Recently I went to a cache that was about 60 feet up in a large pine tree. I was able to see the cache from the ground. I wasn't dressed appropriately to attempt to retrieve the cache. Long pants and gloves would be nice. Maybe I just chickened out and didn’t want to risk my life.

 

My question is about liability. I understand if I make the choice to climb 60 feet up a tree I would assume some of the liability.

 

Who could be held liable if an accident occurred while climbing a tree? Land Owner, Cache Owner, or person climbing the tree.

 

Are there any rules about placing a cache in a dangerous situation? Maybe I am overreacting because I just chickened out of climbing a tree. Some people could define a guard rail cache on a busy street dangerous.

Stepping away from the liability issue that has been so well answered already, are you absolutely sure that the cache requires that you climb the tree? Most of the tree caches that I've found had a way to lower the cache to the ground, even if the mechanism wasn't immediately apparent.

 

Just a thought...

[+monsterbox]

Hi!

 

Hi!

 

This question can only come from an American :-) People here in Europe would just laugh about such a question (and so I do, by the way, sorry ;-).

 

Bye,

Christian

I'm American and I agree with you. It seems like a simple choice and the consequences of screwing up are obvious as well.

 

Thank you :-)

 

First I thought my answer might be much too harsh, but I hoped he will understand it in the end. It was quite similar to those warnings everywhere like not drying animals in a microwave or such things. Just all that stuff people could think about by theirselves if they just try a little bit ;-)

 

Bye,

Christian

[Mushtang]

You could be bit by a poisonous snake hiking to a cache

There's no such thing as a poisonous snake.

 

Okay, that was off topic, but I really wanted to point that out.

 

On topic... I'd say that anyone that chooses to do anything dangerous, especially for a hobby, is responsible for their own injuries.

 

However, if I choose to walk up a flight of stairs while I'm at work (even if it's not part of my job), and I fall and get hurt, I'd expect my employer to pick up the medical bills even though it was my choice to walk up them. What's the difference? I'm guessing it's because the law says they have to.

[+Theseus]

Logically I agree that the responsibility absolutely lies with the finder. Legally, of course, may be different.

 

[Aside] A few years back I served on a jury and someone mentioned a liability case where a drunk driver veered off the road, hit a sign, and was injured. The *driver* sued the town - not on the grounds that the sign was in an unsafe location per se, but on the grounds that the sign was in an unsafe location for someone who was driving while drunk. His argument concluded that the town should acknowledge that people drive drunk and place its signs accordingly. The driver won damages.

 

While this is completely absurd, I'm sure there are plenty of worse examples (hmm, may make for an interesting Off Topic thread). I bet 100 out of 100 rational people would have said there was no way the driver would win. But he did. Again, don't confuse logic with the law. [/Aside]

[+Hoosier Ranger]

There is a geocache in Muncie, IN that is allegedly about 60 feet up in a large Maple tree ("Acrophobia" GC13B08). When I arrived at the tree my initial thought was recalling the geocacher's creed noted in the GPS Adventure Maze on display less than a mile away: "First do no harm to yourself, or to others." From the logs, it appears that most of those who have smileys for this one had a child or teen-ager climb the tree to retrieve the log. (Now I wouldn't claim this as a find myself unless I actually climbed the tree.) I'm all for adventure in geocaching, and would not have hesitated going after this one had I been about ten years old. At age 67 I'm well aware of my limitations and the consequences should I slip and fall from that height. If one uses poor judgement in going after a geocache, it's his/her own fault, not the hider's.

[+Renegade Knight]

...Who could be held liable if an accident occurred while climbing a tree? Land Owner, Cache Owner, or person climbing the tree....

 

You are. You make the choice, you face the consequences of your actions.

 

When it comes to placing caches in "Dangerouse Locations" you have to keep in mind that the cache owner made it out uninjured and so you can too. You of course may fail for any number of reasons because people can get hurt doing anything. If I recall the most likely place for someone to get hurt is their own bathroom. Yet they remain popular. Go figure.

[+Vinny & Sue Team]

I hope it has a 5 terrain rating.

 

As for me, I would pass. Afraid of hights

 

5 stars for climbing a pine tree? Climbing Mt McKinley maybe, but not a pine tree. My tree cache is rated 3 stars for terrain and so is the one owned by another local cacher.

I disagree strongly. From my point of view, any cache which requires risking life and limb, and/or which requires use of special gear -- such as a full set of tree-climbing gear, as does the cache in question -- automatically warrants a Terrain rating of 5 and also warrants explicit warnings/cautions on the cache listing page, along with use of appropriate attribute icons.

[+fo2gra4]

You could be bit by a poisonous snake hiking to a cache

There's no such thing as a poisonous snake.

 

Okay, that was off topic, but I really wanted to point that out.

 

Ok, you made that point, but most people do mean venomous snake when they say poisonous snake.

 

It still means that you could be bitten by a venomous snake while hiking to a cache. Who would be responsible for that? Are you saying it is the cache owners fault? I would not!

 

And if someone was hit by a car when they parked on the side of the road to get a cache. Is that the cache owners fault to? I would not think so.

 

The list of things could go on, but I hope I proved my point. Cachers are responsible for their own actions.

 

As others have stated GC.com info of, cachers assume all responsibility while caching. And to blame the owner for how or where they place the cache. How about GC.com for posting it.

 

Why are we looking for blame? If a cacher does something that gets him or herself hurt, that is where the blame should be. No one else.

 

Even though I know that lawyers will of course always say different, and they of course always make money whether or not they win.

[Mushtang]

You could be bit by a poisonous snake hiking to a cache

There's no such thing as a poisonous snake.

 

Okay, that was off topic, but I really wanted to point that out.

 

Ok, you made that point, but most people do mean venomous snake when they say poisonous snake.

That's true. Most people that use the word poisonous for snakes actually mean venomous. Just doing my part to help educate.

 

It still means that you could be bitten by a venomous snake while hiking to a cache. Who would be responsible for that? Are you saying it is the cache owners fault?

No. How is pointing out the usage of the wrong word saying, in ANY way, that I think it's the cache owners fault?

 

I would not!

Nor would I.

 

And if someone was hit by a car when they parked on the side of the road to get a cache. Is that the cache owners fault to? I would not think so.

 

The list of things could go on, but I hope I proved my point. Cachers are responsible for their own actions.

 

As others have stated GC.com info of, cachers assume all responsibility while caching. And to blame the owner for how or where they place the cache. How about GC.com for posting it.

 

Why are we looking for blame? If a cacher does something that gets him or herself hurt, that is where the blame should be. No one else.

 

Even though I know that lawyers will of course always say different, and they of course always make money whether or not they win.

If you read my on topic posts in this thread I've suggested that the finder is responsible for his actions. But thanks for proving your point.

[+ke6n]

I understand if I make the choice to climb 60 feet up a tree I would assume some of the liability.

You make the choice to climb and assume ALL of the liability.

[+J-Way]

Let me dive a scenario that happened to me.

I was injured while at an event some time ago (Non-Geocaching). Sueing the event sponsors didn't even cross my mind.

I went to the Doctor and turned the bill into my medical insurance. It was the Medical insurance company that did an investigation, and decided all without even asking me that they were going to attempt to recover their costs from the property owner where the event took place.

I never did hear the final outcome, but when lawyers get involved it's never pretty.

This post actually changed my mind a little bit on this topic because it brings "real life" into the discussion. If I were injured while seeking a geocache I would never consider suing the landowner or cache owner except for maybe extremely gross negligence, and maybe not even then. I consider myself responsible for my own actions, and I'm typically observant enough to spot dangerous situations before it's too late.

 

But assuming this injury required medical treatment I probably WOULD turn it in on my health insurance. That's what it's there for, right? And once I do that, the decisions concerning whether or not to attempt to "recover damages" is no longer mine. My insurance company (and its starving lawyers) could decide to sue everyone whether I want them to or not.

[+fo2gra4]

Let me dive a scenario that happened to me.

I was injured while at an event some time ago (Non-Geocaching). Sueing the event sponsors didn't even cross my mind.

I went to the Doctor and turned the bill into my medical insurance. It was the Medical insurance company that did an investigation, and decided all without even asking me that they were going to attempt to recover their costs from the property owner where the event took place.

I never did hear the final outcome, but when lawyers get involved it's never pretty.

This post actually changed my mind a little bit on this topic because it brings "real life" into the discussion. If I were injured while seeking a geocache I would never consider suing the landowner or cache owner except for maybe extremely gross negligence, and maybe not even then. I consider myself responsible for my own actions, and I'm typically observant enough to spot dangerous situations before it's too late.

 

But assuming this injury required medical treatment I probably WOULD turn it in on my health insurance. That's what it's there for, right? And once I do that, the decisions concerning whether or not to attempt to "recover damages" is no longer mine. My insurance company (and its starving lawyers) could decide to sue everyone whether I want them to or not.

 

I agree with you on this point, but none of us have any say over what our medical insurance or any other type of insurance company does. They will have to prove that it was who evers fault to win their case. At least you did the right thing and took care of your injuries without blaming anyone.

[+fo2gra4]

Mushtang, sorry if you thought my whole post was talking about you. I used your post to show the change to venomous snake from poisonous snake. Then I went about posting to the rest of the topic on responsibilities. Sorry if I offended you. My apologies!

[Mushtang]

Mushtang, sorry if you thought my whole post was talking about you. I used your post to show the change to venomous snake from poisonous snake. Then I went about posting to the rest of the topic on responsibilities. Sorry if I offended you. My apologies!

I think confused would be a more accurate word than offended.

 

I haven't been offended in these forums yet. I have very thick skin when reading posts.

 

(I actually typed "I have very thick forum skin", but decided to change it since it didn't sound good at all)

[+cerberus1]

Since Harry Dolphin placed a pic of my backside on this forum , I thought I'd "butt" in...

That cache was Woodlit & kc2cfl 's "klahym" (GCZ7EB).

Geocaching.com has a very articulate section on "liability" and CACHER (not owner, park,city, state) responsibility. Common sense should fit in there also.

I've done a few specialized-equipment caches and ALL cache owner's have had an additional reminder to be careful. All have warnings stating that if you're not sure of yourself OR equiptment DON'T do it for a "smiley".

Most offer to accompany you ( if your dumb enough to attempt alone) - just in case...

Heck, most folks know who the "fivers" are, just an e-mail and they'd help. YOU buy coffee.

Cache safe.

[+briansnat]

I hope it has a 5 terrain rating.

 

As for me, I would pass. Afraid of hights

 

5 stars for climbing a pine tree? Climbing Mt McKinley maybe, but not a pine tree. My tree cache is rated 3 stars for terrain and so is the one owned by another local cacher.

 

Tree spikes or climbing ropes sure seems like "special equipment" to me, just as the "smiley value" for a cache on top of Everest is exactly the same as a cache hidden underneath a lamp post cover

 

Who needs tree spikes or climbing rope for climbing a pine tree? It's like climbing a ladder. Besides using tree spikes on a life tree to find a cache is a very bad idea.

[+Kit Fox]

 

Who needs tree spikes or climbing rope for climbing a pine tree? It's like climbing a ladder. Besides using tree spikes on a life tree to find a cache is a very bad idea.

 

Gotcha,

 

I thought you were referring to all tree caches. I spoke to a certified arborist, and he told me that tree spikes are harmless on a "thick barked" trees Ropes are the best method though, and so are the radio controlled monkies issued to the platinum members.

 

My tree cache doesn't have many limbs to use as a ladder.

 

[mikej2]

Note to self: add this to eventual cache tool and equipment list:

[+Lightning Jeff]

I went to the Doctor and turned the bill into my medical insurance. It was the Medical insurance company that did an investigation, and decided all without even asking me that they were going to attempt to recover their costs from the property owner where the event took place.

 

I never did hear the final outcome, but when lawyers get involved it's never pretty.

I'm sure you know this, but it wasn't the lawyer who decided to sue the property owner.

[+Bill & Tammy]

Note to self: add this to eventual cache tool and equipment list:

 

hmmmm, or possibly one these to recover those caches in potentially life threatening situations, at least I could say I took most reasonable precautions should I be injured and tempted to litigate:

 

[+fo2gra4]

Note to self: add this to eventual cache tool and equipment list:

 

hmmmm, or possibly one these to recover those caches in potentially life threatening situations, at least I could say I took most reasonable precautions should I be injured and tempted to litigate:

 

 

I want one of both!!!!

[+jtbrady01]

I'll chime in on this topic since I did a tree climb that if I fell would have put me into a river. The posting explained the risks involved and the fact that most people would need to use a rope. I use to climb trees all the time when I was younger and not so wise. I got out there and fashioned a rope ladder climbed the tree. Tied myself to the tree, retrieved the cache and then climbed back down. Unlike a pine tree there were no lower branches to grab onto. Everyone when going after a cache needs to look at the area and make their own decision if they are capable of doing the task at hand. If not, don't do it. It's that simple. I assumed the risk. If I had fallen it would have been no one's fault but mine. Oh, by the way. When doing something like this take a cell phone or a two way radio in case you do injure yourself.

[+ke6n]

Oh, by the way. When doing something like this take a cell phone or a two way radio in case you do injure yourself.

Better yet, do these types with a friend.

[+jtbrady01]

Oh, by the way. When doing something like this take a cell phone or a two way radio in case you do injure yourself.

Better yet, do these types with a friend.

 

See your point. However, maybe it's my military background I seem to work better alone most of the time. Plus, it's hard to pair up with another geocacher all the time to go after the same cache.

[+geomann1]

Note to self: add this to eventual cache tool and equipment list:

 

What about a good old fashioned chain saw, particularly if a FTF is at stake!

 

(I am just kidding)

[+The Jester]

I'll chime in on this topic since I did a tree climb that if I fell would have put me into a river.

 

...

 

Oh, by the way. When doing something like this take a cell phone or a two way radio in case you do injure yourself.

Just make sure everything is waterproof, so you can call for help while drifting down the river.