Jump to content

New 'Clever' Caches


Recommended Posts

Well, it's been an interesting read so far, and I still stand by my thoughts.

Just this last weekend, I talked with more than one seasoned cacher who'd dismantled a sprinkler head mistakenly looking for a cache. I know if I managed a park and found someone pulling up sprinkler heads, that'd be the end of caching in my land management area.

I guess I'm just old school. You know, where the idea of cacheing was to place a cache somewhere you wanted people to see and experience.

To each their own I suppose.

Yup, you're 'Old School'.

 

It's amusing that I found my first 'sprinkler head' cache just over a week before you started playing the game.

 

(Edited to add that businesses and individuals in our area are still able to use sprinklers without geocachers tearing them up. Also, noting that I've never seen sprinklers in a standard park. Perhaps most parks don't use sprinklers. Perhaps, I just haven't keyed in on them in my path of destruction.)

 

Or, perhaps not ALL caches are placed in a park?? I've seen one sprinkler cache placed very close to a real sprinkler. When I went to find the cache, I saw a REAL sprinkler torn up (yep, looked as if someone took a screwdriver to it) and left in shambles...those aren't cheap as I can attest (we do own a golf course which uses sprinklers much like the one I saw). This was in Vegas right by a busy street in plain view of TONS of muggles. I also saw one placed right beside a bus stop (not sure if a park was behind the bus stop, but I doubt it) which had real sprinklers nearby (within the margin of error). You want examples, here they are!

 

I don't think Denvernator was singling YOU out sbell (although you took it personally), but ANY cacher who'd place a hide of this nature and then defend their actions. I think we can all agree (if we want to be honest about it) that there ARE careless cachers and there IS the possiblity of a problem. Or we could just act like it's silly to worry about something that has never happened before (can anyone say 9/11??).

Link to comment

Well, it's been an interesting read so far, and I still stand by my thoughts.

Just this last weekend, I talked with more than one seasoned cacher who'd dismantled a sprinkler head mistakenly looking for a cache. I know if I managed a park and found someone pulling up sprinkler heads, that'd be the end of caching in my land management area.

I guess I'm just old school. You know, where the idea of cacheing was to place a cache somewhere you wanted people to see and experience.

To each their own I suppose.

Yup, you're 'Old School'.

 

It's amusing that I found my first 'sprinkler head' cache just over a week before you started playing the game.

 

(Edited to add that businesses and individuals in our area are still able to use sprinklers without geocachers tearing them up. Also, noting that I've never seen sprinklers in a standard park. Perhaps most parks don't use sprinklers. Perhaps, I just haven't keyed in on them in my path of destruction.)

Or, perhaps not ALL caches are placed in a park?? I've seen one sprinkler cache placed very close to a real sprinkler. When I went to find the cache, I saw a REAL sprinkler torn up (yep, looked as if someone took a screwdriver to it) and left in shambles...those aren't cheap as I can attest (we do own a golf course which uses sprinklers much like the one I saw). This was in Vegas right by a busy street in plain view of TONS of muggles. I also saw one placed right beside a bus stop (not sure if a park was behind the bus stop, but I doubt it) which had real sprinklers nearby (within the margin of error). You want examples, here they are!

 

I don't think Denvernator was singling YOU out sbell (although you took it personally), but ANY cacher who'd place a hide of this nature and then defend their actions. I think we can all agree (if we want to be honest about it) that there ARE careless cachers and there IS the possiblity of a problem. Or we could just act like it's silly to worry about something that has never happened before (can anyone say 9/11??).

1) I mentioned parks because his post mentioned parks.

2) If you quote someone and use the pronoun 'you', you are generally singling that person out.

3) Unique cache containers have been around since the beginning. They are overwhelmingly accepted and almost never cause any problems.

4) Sometimes sprinkler heads, like everything get damaged. Just because you see something broken while you are looking for a cache does not mean that a geocacher broke it.

5) 9/11 was not a completely unique occurrence.

Link to comment
4) Sometimes sprinkler heads, like everything get damaged. Just because you see something broken while you are looking for a cache does not mean that a geocacher broke it.

 

I wish I could remember which cache this was, I didn't log it since I'm against this type of hide...but the person actually logged that they "accidentally" tore up a real sprinkler head during the search and even went so far as to suggest future hunters to "be careful". Yes, it WAS a cacher...sorry!

 

and as to #2, you truly are taking things WAY to personal today. As I said in another topic, not all the world is against YOU! YOU see, sometimes YOU is used in a generic term. I hope this helps YOU!

Edited by Rockin Roddy
Link to comment

Or, perhaps not ALL caches are placed in a park?? I've seen one sprinkler cache placed very close to a real sprinkler. When I went to find the cache, I saw a REAL sprinkler torn up (yep, looked as if someone took a screwdriver to it) and left in shambles...

 

Those darned park maintenance men!! They always go on coffee break and leave things torn apart!

 

Or we could just act like it's silly to worry about something that has never happened before (can anyone say 9/11??).

 

Huh??? We're comparing caches with 9/11 now??? :D

 

All I can say is... more electrical box caches may mean fewer torn apart sprinkler head caches! :anitongue:

Link to comment

I've seen one sprinkler cache placed very close to a real sprinkler. <snip> This was in Vegas right by a busy street in plain view of TONS of muggles.

I looked for several caches in Vegas back in February. I wonder if the cache you refer to was one I was looking for - outside Excalibur perhaps?

 

I felt very uneasy searching in "Muggleville" especially with all the "Secret Service" and "Mafia" type "suits" hanging around all over the place.

 

I can't imagine anyone having orbs enough to mess with a sprinkler head around there.

 

I never even THOUGHT to check out sprinkler heads. If that is what the cache is in an environment like that, I would be happy to just walk away. Mostly that is what I did. (small orbs I reckon)

Link to comment

I think its silly and dangerous to hide caches near electrical stuff or looking like electrical stuff. Plain and simple, stupid idea.

 

Johnnygeo's Geocaching Electrical Safety Blog

This guy actually works for the power company, unlike most of us.

http://johnnygeo-blog.blogspot.com/

 

BTW, the argument "it hasn't happened yet so it won't" is a classical logical fallacy of presumption. In particular, its a form of "argument from ignorance." I don't think we can even say that it hasn't happened. In the words of Donald Rumsfeld, "we don't know what we don't know." Kids have been killed by stuff as seemingly harmless as a flourescent bulb at a carwash.

http://www.logicalfallacies.info

Edited by Zeevious
Link to comment
... I don't think we can even say that it hasn't happened. In the words of Donald Rumsfeld, "we don't know what we don't know." Kids have been killed by stuff as seemingly harmless as a flourescent bulb at a carwash.

http://www.logicalfallacies.info

I'm not sure if quoting Donald Rumsfeld is a good way to persuade anyone. :D

 

The fact is, the geocaching grapevine is very good. If someone had been electrocuted while geocaching, I think that there is an extremely high probability that three threads about it would have been created before the body stopped smoking.

Link to comment

Don't waste your time Zee, this too will be argued until the cows come home!

 

I truly wish I remember CC, I don't remember it being on the strip though (but it was awhile ago...in Vegas. I need say no more) Shortly after looking, I gave up on the urbans and went for the off-road caches in the mountains. I think one was Holey wall (which I DNF'd. Was 500' from the cache...straight up). I do remember leaving Mule cave, but can't recall what the other cache was (the one which I suspect was where I had my tire troubles). I never did find a cache IN Vegas...but I hope to get back soon.

 

Maybe in Summerlin?? If I get a chance, I'll try to find my notes from then.

Link to comment

No off-road caches? But it's fun trying not to get bitten by Habu (that's snakes :blink: ). What about SCUBA Caches? Scuba diving is a dangerous sport, right? I've been considering a Scuba accessed Geocache - now, is my choice of location going to cause cachers to scuba w/o first obtaining PADI/MAUI/whatever certification? I sure hope that when the cacher finds themselves facing the ocean, with the GPS telling them that it is still just under a quarter of a mile off shore, that they may decide that they need additional equipment - and most reputable dive shops will not rent gear to uncertified customers. Additionally, in the hints I'll recommend two tanks - one to retrieve, one to return. I'll implace it in a good place to spend an hour-long (or longer) surface interval! Plus I'm fairly sure that the difficulty would have to be high. I'm thinking of putting it 35 feet deep - within the depth limits for Junior Open Water Certified Divers under 12 years old! (PADI standards). (Gotta make it so my daughter and I will be able to maintain the cache!) I do however need to make sure that I make the cache environmentally friendly - sure would hate to damage the coral reef just to geocache. And, have to make sure the cache does not look anything like unexploded ordinance from WWII - that would be bad, very bad. The fun would be checking on the cache after each and every typhoon!

 

I believe that Geocachers need to use some sense - common or uncommon. Geocache at your own risk. If finding the cache is potentially an unnecessary risk, go find a different one. My family and I are on a small island. True we just started geocaching, but there are plently of caches here for us to find without endangering ourselves. I will not use tools to find a cache. I do like that there is a clever cache here that has a combo lock on it and you have to count items in the area to figure out the combo... you have to count the stairs on the way up to it! That's creative!

 

Stupid people will do stupid things. We can't plan against all of them. I agree that teaching kids to take private property apart or endanger their (or someone else's) safety to earn a smiley face is dumb. Making the sport so destruction of property is likely is wrong. Creativity is important, but it cannot result in Geocaching becoming an illegal activity.

Link to comment

Scuba caches have been done and are as safe as any other cache that has the proper warnings, attributes and instruction. A scuba cache will need to be given the right D/T rating of a 5/5 or thereabouts. As well, an off-road cache will likely be given the right D/T rating and have some sort of information cluing one in to what they are going after.

 

There is no way to KNOW ahead of time that a "clever cache" is the type of container you'll be going after (unless the owner decides to put that in the description which is doubtful). You can't tell the cache will be an electric box, fake fence post or sprinkler head. Once there, how will one know the container until they do some searching? You might not even know unless you find the container. Common or uncommon sense will not be much help with the decision of going after one of these hides.

 

I'm not against caches that require you to use special equipment (as long as the equipment isn't used to take apart a sign, sprinkler or gaurdrail), V&S have some interesting EXTREME hides that I'd like to go after. It's the potentially dangerous hides which worry me. The ones which are concealed in or around real dangers, or made to look like a real danger. Those containers that might cause destruction of private property are troublesome as well since they could result in a careless cacher ripping apart a real item causing trouble for caching in whole.

 

Again, this has been argued to death and those that will poo-poo this will likely not be swayed (neither will I). The Denvernators brings up a reasonable concern, one I share...maybe others do as well. If not, well, do what you wish. I just hope it's not your cache that ends up proving our point.

Link to comment

Its interesting, were arguing whether an electricalbox cache is safe or not. This thread is postd in the same section as 'do you carry a gun when geocaching and have you had to use it' and 'how do you carry your gun when geocaching'.

 

Please dont get me wrong I have nothing against guns, I own two and go shooting very regularly. But I would have thought that going caching armed would be of a little more concern than whether anyones stupid enough to electrocute themself. I admit that you do have some big bad animals over there that are reason enough to carry a gun but not concerning enough to ban all caches outside of carefully sanitised areas where the wildlife is behind bars.

 

Oh and going by twocents each were up to $1.42

Wow! What a completely nonsensical non-sequitur!

 

Have they really brainwashed the masses so much over there that one cannot even conceive of carrying a gun in a safe manner? Is there something that is just irrevocably BOUND to hurt someone about a gun?

 

I have carried for over 30 years and haven't hurt myself or anyone else yet.

 

I fail to see how the simple existence of an inanimate object is in itself "dangerous."

 

Anyway, i thought the discussion was about dismantling other peoples' property to search for a cache.

 

Now I get it! How could I be so dense! DUH!

 

I wholeheartedly agree that if a cacher tries to take apart another cacher's gun, because once upon a time someone hid a cache that looked like a gun, it could get pretty nasty indeed!

Link to comment

Its interesting, were arguing whether an electricalbox cache is safe or not. This thread is postd in the same section as 'do you carry a gun when geocaching and have you had to use it' and 'how do you carry your gun when geocaching'.

 

Please dont get me wrong I have nothing against guns, I own two and go shooting very regularly. But I would have thought that going caching armed would be of a little more concern than whether anyones stupid enough to electrocute themself. I admit that you do have some big bad animals over there that are reason enough to carry a gun but not concerning enough to ban all caches outside of carefully sanitised areas where the wildlife is behind bars.

 

Oh and going by twocents each were up to $1.42

Wow! What a completely nonsensical non-sequitur!

 

Have they really brainwashed the masses so much over there that one cannot even conceive of carrying a gun in a safe manner? Is there something that is just irrevocably BOUND to hurt someone about a gun?

 

I have carried for over 30 years and haven't hurt myself or anyone else yet.

 

I fail to see how the simple existence of an inanimate object is in itself "dangerous."

 

Anyway, i thought the discussion was about dismantling other peoples' property to search for a cache.

 

Now I get it! How could I be so dense! DUH!

 

I wholeheartedly agree that if a cacher tries to take apart another cacher's gun, because once upon a time someone hid a cache that looked like a gun, it could get pretty nasty indeed!

 

:D:D:D:D:D:D

Link to comment

Go back and read it again. I am fully in favour of guns and indeed quite jealous of your arms laws. I am talking about the fact that you ( in a broad sense) are worrying about someone electrocuting themself while looking for a cache but not that the same people might be carrying guns. Now that is dumb!!

 

Now for some statistics (just googled for them)

 

Year 2003

Odds of dying from Firearms Discharge

Deaths - 730

One Year Odds - 398,425

Lifetime Odds- 5,134

 

Odds of dying from Electrical Transmission Lines

Deaths - 96

One Year Odds - 3,029,688

Lifetime Odds- 39,042

 

Odds of dying from Other and unspecified electric current

Deaths - 280

One Year Odds - 1,038,750

Lifetime Odds - 13,386

 

http://www.nsc.org/lrs/statinfo/odds.htm

I fear that we are getting further and further away from the topic, but I think that it's important to remember that your odds regarding dying from firearms discharges are likely skewed by what I would categorize as 'bad acts' and 'police actions'. Further, I suspect that they are not odds, at all. I find it hard to believe that a person's lifetime chance of dying due to electrical transmission lines is 1 in 39,042. In fact, all of these 'odds' seem greatly inflated, to me.

 

Odds of dying by legal execution: 62,468. How many geocachers are there?

Edited by sbell111
Link to comment

Go back and read it again. I am fully in favour of guns and indeed quite jealous of your arms laws. I am talking about the fact that you ( in a broad sense) are worrying about someone electrocuting themself while looking for a cache but not that the same people might be carrying guns. Now that is dumb!!

Now I understand. (no sarcasm this time)

 

The same people that are likely to be dumb enough to forniculate with live electrical boxes and thus fry themselves are carrying guns. Point well taken... IF they are the same people. I DO take exception with that... the notion that those carrying guns are "Cletis the Yokel" types is a very common but baseless stereotype.

 

So to get SLIGHTLY back on topic... this "stupid cacher" stereotype is problematic at all levels and IMO is the root of this discussion. Perhaps it even goes deeper- to the "stupid general public" stereotype of the elitists (especially in gubbament) who take great pleasure in running others' lives in ever more intimate details yet usually can't seem to run their own lives very well at all.

 

This stereotype is the driving force of this thread and all the others that seek to protect the "stupid general public" from themselves. And i must say i have either fallen victim to the stereotype or facetiously promulgated it myself on numerous occasions.

 

In general, caching is an activity of TRUST. We trust that the hider will not unduly endanger the seeker. We trust that the seeker will not take untoward risks.

 

Since I disagree with the stereotype of "stupid general public," I don't see these "hazards" as a serious concern. I agree there will be SOME stupidity, but overall I believe it is not worth changing our rules or anything like that. At the most, a "word to the wise" is sufficient.

 

As in all other aspects of our (adult) lives, we really don't need a "daddy" looking after us- not in caching, and not in gubbament. *gets off political soapbox*

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...