Question about proper cache placement

[+Shriekback]

This may be in the wrong forum, so please move it if you deem it inappropriate.

 

The problem that I am having is whether or not (and indeed to whom) I should report a person that seems to be somehow sidestepping the commonly accepted rules of cache placement.

 

The story goes as follows:

 

There is a person in the area that I work (and subsequently cache the most since I cleared out my hometown) that has been placing caches like crazy. Now, normally I would be very excited about this, but the problem lies in the way the caches are placed.

 

This person has placed far more caches than he has found to start. Really this is so much a problem. I mean honestly I have 250+ caches and know that I am still a "newbie" at this game. No big deal there. What I think this leads to is his caches are typically 70ft off coords and most of them are micros. No, this isn't my big complaint, but I thought I'd write a nice lead up to it.

 

My largest complaint is that he places on private property most of the time. There is no mention in any of his caches that he has obtained permission or even attempted to do so. This has started to become a large problem for several reasons. First, several people I know that have done his caches have reported that the property owners, managers, or simply people that work in the various places have asked what the cachers were doing and after an explaination the cachers were asked to leave given that it was private property and no permission had been given. Second, I myself was approached by several policeman (3 cars!!!) after I was searching for and found a cache that was apparantly on private property placed by this person. (Apparantly I was not being stealthy enough as a neighbor spotted me! *blush*) Thankfully I was able to explain the purpose of what I was doing enough so that they were convinced I was not a terrorist (though in hindsight I was wearing my black trench that day) and I was allowed to go. Third... well, he placed one AT the police station without permission listed.... *shrug*

 

I would like to say that I understand why he places these on private property. Typically they are locations that have some historical impact in our community. However usually whatever made them historic has long since gone to rot or moved on and someone has purchased the land, etc. Mind you, I still don't get the police station cache, but that's just me I suppose.

 

My concern here is that his caches may cause a major problem for cachers in the area given the number of people I have heard complaints from and to a lesser extent the saturation of his caches in the area (he's placed well over 250 since Sept or Oct!) I'm just very afraid that in the future this may lead to a major cutdown on allowed geocaching activity in the area or at worst a complete ban! We live in a relatively major metropolitan area and that would be terrible for the geocachers here!

 

I may want to say that I don't even know the guy so I don't want anyone to think this is some kind of vendetta. My concern is for geocaching and the way it's perceived by the "muggles."

 

Anyway, does anyone have any suggestions as to what I could or indeed should do?

 

I should start a poll... Shut my mouth or speak up!

 

Thanks in advance!

 

Wumpus

[+admo1972]

If you know or even suspect that caches are placed on private property, email such to your local reviewer. It is then in the reviewers, CO, and Land Owners hands as to whether the caches get archived or continue to stand. That is as far as your responsibility needs to go.

[+sbell111]

My spidey sense is tingling like mad.

[+Shriekback]

Well that all makes sense. I guess my other thing, should I only worry about caches I have been to or ones that I have heard about as well?

 

I don't want to cause a huge fuss. Just trying to put the FUN back into "fundamentals of geocaching."

 

Ech. Bad joke.

[+Renegade Knight]

...My largest complaint is that he places on private property most of the time. There is no mention in any of his caches that he has obtained permission or even attempted to do so....

 

When he checked submitted the caches he also said he had adequate permission for those caches. The story ends there unless you have direct evidence that he doesn't have that permission.

 

If you don't like that the caches are on private property and it makes you uncomfortable. Don't cache there. However that doesn't mean there is a problem with the cache. It's merely your own spin on the world.

[+Renegade Knight]

... Just trying to put the FUN back into "fundamentals of geocaching."...

 

Most people who say that then launch into a reason why someone else is blocking their fun and how that someone else should change what they do.

 

Reality is, you are in charge of your own fun. If you want to have fun. Do so. If you want to have fun and something isn't fun. Stop and do something else. Fun isn't rocket science, but some people seem to want it to be.

[+Renegade Knight]

If you know or even suspect that caches are placed on private property, email such to your local reviewer. ...

 

A cache on private property isn't an issue. You need a real problem before it's worth doing anything about. Not an artificial one. You also need to try and contact the cache owner. They are the ones who placed the cache, they are the ones who are responsible, they are the ones with the authority to do something about the cache. This site is a listing service. While reviewers can step in, their authorithy is to deal with the listing, not the cache. If you do have a real problem (property owner yelling at you to take away the cache and never come back) where quick action is needed, by all means use the SBA log and it will come to the attention of a reviwer and they can archive the listing.

[+StarBrand]

Any cache you positively know is there without any permission or the land owners have asked you to leave should be followed up by an email to the owner asking for the nature of the permission granted. If there is a problem (for certain) - log an SBA with detailed notes. Best you can do.

[+admo1972]

If you know or even suspect that caches are placed on private property, email such to your local reviewer. ...

 

A cache on private property isn't an issue. You need a real problem before it's worth doing anything about. Not an artificial one. You also need to try and contact the cache owner. They are the ones who placed the cache, they are the ones who are responsible, they are the ones with the authority to do something about the cache. This site is a listing service. While reviewers can step in, their authorithy is to deal with the listing, not the cache. If you do have a real problem (property owner yelling at you to take away the cache and never come back) where quick action is needed, by all means use the SBA log and it will come to the attention of a reviwer and they can archive the listing.

 

True. What I meant to say was If you know or even suspect that caches are placed on private property without permission. It seemed that the original poster knows for a fact that some caches were placed on private property without permission. It is only those that he need be concerned with, and can bring it to the review or owners attention.

Edited December 21, 2007 by admo1972

[+sbell111]

... It seemed that the original poster knows for a fact that some caches were placed on private property without permission. It is only those that he need be concerned with, and can bring it to the review or owners attention.

Actually, he suspects that they were placed without permission. He does not 'know' that.

[+wimseyguy]

My largest complaint is that he places on private property most of the time. There is no mention in any of his caches that he has obtained permission or even attempted to do so. This has started to become a large problem for several reasons. First, several people I know that have done his caches have reported that the property owners, managers, or simply people that work in the various places have asked what the cachers were doing and after an explaination the cachers were asked to leave given that it was private property and no permission had been given. Second, I myself was approached by several policeman (3 cars!!!) after I was searching for and found a cache that was apparantly on private property placed by this person. (Apparantly I was not being stealthy enough as a neighbor spotted me! *blush*) Thankfully I was able to explain the purpose of what I was doing enough so that they were convinced I was not a terrorist (though in hindsight I was wearing my black trench that day) and I was allowed to go. Third... well, he placed one AT the police station without permission listed....

If you have personally been approached by the property owner or law enforcement while seeking one of these caches that you suspect to be placed on private property then post a Should Be Archived note on the listing. This notifies the owner and local reviewer that there may be an issue with this specific cache. You should encourage these 'other people' to do the same. No one should make any blanket statements or assumptions about the hider's motivations, nor methods beyond that.

 

It isn't required to mention that permission has been granted on a cache page, but it is a considerate thing to do. It is also possible that permission has been granted by someone who has failed to notify everyone else connected with the property and the neighbors. It's also possible that these are hidden without permission. You don't know either way, so just report the ones you have a personal experience with and let the reviewers and Groundspeak and the owner sort it out.

[+Shriekback]

Again, not trying to start a fight, but I do absolutely know of a few that have NOT gotten permission because the owner told me so. So basically it's boiled down to the situation where I will mention those to a reviewer, but not worry about any others that I haven't specifically verified.

 

Also, I'm well aware that I make my own fun in this game. I just don't want the chances of other people having fun limited by people not following the rules. I would feel terrible if the game was limited because of my lack of "action" whatever that might be.

 

Of course, thinking more about it, I'm NOT a reviewer and really shouldn't worry about it. I'll just go grab the ones I'm comfortable with retrieving and leave the rest be.

 

I was just curious if anyone thought this could possibly become a bigger problem.

Edited December 21, 2007 by The Wumpus

[+Shriekback]

Wimseyguy answered my question perfectly as I was typing the above. Just worry about the one's you have had personal experiance with and let the others stand. Sounds good here!

 

I also know what it's like on a property where the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing. For one of my caches I had obtained permission from both the local facilited dept AND the security dept... but it was the Art dept that had a problem! Ah well.

 

Thanks all.

[+briansnat]

... It seemed that the original poster knows for a fact that some caches were placed on private property without permission. It is only those that he need be concerned with, and can bring it to the review or owners attention.

Actually, he suspects that they were placed without permission. He does not 'know' that.

 

I think the fact finders have been approached and told to leave might indicate an issue with permission.

Edited December 21, 2007 by briansnat

[+Renegade Knight]

...True. What I meant to say was If you know or even suspect that caches are placed on private property without permission....

 

Having just dealt with what suspicision without actual evidence does to people...I find my stance that you need to KNOW before you act reinforced. Acting on suspicion by itself just wastes everones time.

[+Renegade Knight]

...I think the fact finders have been approached and told to leave might indicate an issue with permission.

That's a strong indicator.

[+elmuyloco5]

Again, not trying to start a fight, but I do absolutely know of a few that have NOT gotten permission because the owner told me so. So basically it's boiled down to the situation where I will mention those to a reviewer, but not worry about any others that I haven't specifically verified.

 

Of course, thinking more about it, I'm NOT a reviewer and really shouldn't worry about it. I'll just go grab the ones I'm comfortable with retrieving and leave the rest be.

 

I was just curious if anyone thought this could possibly become a bigger problem.

 

Tell the property owner, or police, that approach you how to contact Geocaching.com if they would like the item removed. Then notify the owner of the cache about what happened. Anyone else that converses with you about the same thing happening when searching for a different cache by this member, should be recommended to do the same thing. I would be careful though not to approach the owner about any caches that you have not encountered an incident with as you might find some retaliation from the cache owner. Some people just can't seem to be adult about these sorts of things. And lastly, if this individual has issues like this with his caches, ignore any future ones and those you have not found yet. If your local reviewer has to archive several due to this person not having prior permission, they will remember the issue when it comes to approving new ones in the future. It's best to keep yourself out of things as much as possible.

[+egami]

...My largest complaint is that he places on private property most of the time. There is no mention in any of his caches that he has obtained permission or even attempted to do so....

 

When he checked submitted the caches he also said he had adequate permission for those caches. The story ends there unless you have direct evidence that he doesn't have that permission.

 

If you don't like that the caches are on private property and it makes you uncomfortable. Don't cache there. However that doesn't mean there is a problem with the cache. It's merely your own spin on the world.

 

Because we all know no one checks agreement boxes on internet sites without actually violating what they just agreed to...

 

If they have a question that's what the reviewer is for. People shouldn't be disuaded from making sure caches actually have permission if they have reason to believe that permission was maybe never granted.

Edited December 21, 2007 by egami

[+ReadyOrNot]

Of course, thinking more about it, I'm NOT a reviewer and really shouldn't worry about it. I'll just go grab the ones I'm comfortable with retrieving and leave the rest be.

 

We are all reviewers. If you feel there is a problem with a cache, you've got every right and sometimes a responsibility to let someone know about it. All it takes is one poorly placed cache in a bad location to ruin the fun for everyone else.

 

Do what you feel is right.

[+sbell111]

...I think the fact finders have been approached and told to leave might indicate an issue with permission.

That's a strong indicator.

It sure is, but as we all know from previous threads and experience 'in the field', it is not an absolute indicator. Edited December 21, 2007 by sbell111

[+egami]

... It seemed that the original poster knows for a fact that some caches were placed on private property without permission. It is only those that he need be concerned with, and can bring it to the review or owners attention.

Actually, he suspects that they were placed without permission. He does not 'know' that.

 

That's easy enough...walk up to the property owner and ask.

[+Renegade Knight]

...Because we all know no one checks agreement boxes on internet sites without actually violating what they just agreed to...

 

If they have a question that's what the reviewer is for. People shouldn't be disuaded from making sure caches actually have permission if they have reason to believe that permission was maybe never granted.

 

Your stance is that we should assume people are not good at their word and so we should check up on everone as a result. I'm for giving them the benefit of the doubt. If there is no problem then there is no problem. That works for me. I don't believe in making life more complex for the innocent for the sake of the guilty.

 

Plan B though is to think that every person who hunts your caches should ask you if you have adequate permission, then ask you to conform it with positve proof, then follow up with the land owner to verify it, and cross check wiht the reviewer to make sure they did their job, then stick their seal of approval on the cache, which of course is worhtless because everyone knows that if you didn't verify it youself, it's suspect... It doesn't take too much of that thinking to make life a PITA.

 

As for reviewes, they list caches, they archive caches, they can even ask questions about a cache. That's about their limit. They are volunteers and don't have control of the cache. That's the cache owners job as owner.

[+egami]

...Because we all know no one checks agreement boxes on internet sites without actually violating what they just agreed to...

 

If they have a question that's what the reviewer is for. People shouldn't be disuaded from making sure caches actually have permission if they have reason to believe that permission was maybe never granted.

 

Your stance is that we should assume people are not good at their word and so we should check up on everone as a result.

 

Don't put words in my mouth. Nothing I said even came close to that. If you want to contest what I said then contest it in context.

 

My point is simple: Checking a box that says "I agree that I have obtained permission" does not mean they actually did. True or false?

 

True.

[+tabulator32]

I have had a couple opportunities to sweet talk a property owner into allowing a cache on their property they previously knew nothing about. I was out hunting the cache and the owner saw me, watched me, approached me and it basically went something like this.

 

Them: "Hi."

 

Me: "Hi! How are ya?!" Big smile.

 

"I'm alright. 'Mind if I ask what you're doin' out here?"

 

"I'm out here geocaching...looking for the one you set up on your property here. By the way, we really appreciate you setting up a cache out here. It looks like a great hide! I haven't found it yet."

 

"Wait...what? Geo- what? What are you talking about?"

 

"Uh-oh! Oh, man! You mean you didn't know about the geocache hidden out here? Wow! Whoever did it must have stuck it out here without getting your permission. That is DEFINITELY against the rules! If you want, I'll be glad to remove it for you. Or, since this one has been here for a couple years, perhaps it would be alright if we just left it for the other cachers to find in the future."

 

They would listen to me banter on about geocaching and let it all sink in and I would keep trying to let them in on the big secret of geocaching and all its tips and tricks and before ya know it, they want to check it out online and get an account.

 

"Well, thanks again for your time! I hope you have fun with it and I'm sure your nephew will have a ball once you teach him about it. If you ever need help picking out a GPS or finding a cache, just email me at this address. Oh, and did you want me to take this off of your property or is it alright if we just leave it here? Great! I'm sure the future cachers who come along will really appreciate it."

 

 

I've done that twice now. 'Worked both times.

 

When it comes down to it...their is nothing like being honest and polite with a property owner and not trying to "pull one past" them.

[+Renegade Knight]

...I would be careful though not to approach the owner about any caches that you have not encountered an incident with as you might find some retaliation from the cache owner. Some people just can't seem to be adult about these sorts of things....

 

A finder approaching the land owner is a different problem.

 

I have had daughters chew my butt for talking to the owner because the owner is getting on in years and not quite savvy enough to do business. I've had people who didn't own jack tell me they did just because they wanted to impose their will on my being near what they own. I've been warned by locals about a rancher who fences off BLM roads to protect "his lands". I've met with people who's nostrels were flaring, their pupils were dialated, and their rage barely controlled over the thought that something I was doing might impact their property without even touching it. A finder normally doesn't have any of this information going into the cache. Second guessing is bad business. Unless you have clear and specific knowledge you are just as likely to create problems as solve anything. More likely most times.

 

Meaning well, is all well and good, but meaning well should result in good deeds. Not going off half cocked and causing probems. Some people need to be adult about going into things. "First do no harm". Always good advice, and hard enough to follow.

[+Shriekback]

I have had a couple opportunities to sweet talk a property owner into allowing a cache on their property they previously knew nothing about. I was out hunting the cache and the owner saw me, watched me, approached me and it basically went something like this.

 

Them: "Hi."

 

Me: "Hi! How are ya?!" Big smile.

 

"I'm alright. 'Mind if I ask what you're doin' out here?"

 

"I'm out here geocaching...looking for the one you set up on your property here. By the way, we really appreciate you setting up a cache out here. It looks like a great hide! I haven't found it yet."

 

"Wait...what? Geo- what? What are you talking about?"

 

"Uh-oh! Oh, man! You mean you didn't know about the geocache hidden out here? Wow! Whoever did it must have stuck it out here without getting your permission. That is DEFINITELY against the rules! If you want, I'll be glad to remove it for you. Or, since this one has been here for a couple years, perhaps it would be alright if we just left it for the other cachers to find in the future."

 

They would listen to me banter on about geocaching and let it all sink in and I would keep trying to let them in on the big secret of geocaching and all its tips and tricks and before ya know it, they want to check it out online and get an account.

 

"Well, thanks again for your time! I hope you have fun with it and I'm sure your nephew will have a ball once you teach him about it. If you ever need help picking out a GPS or finding a cache, just email me at this address. Oh, and did you want me to take this off of your property or is it alright if we just leave it here? Great! I'm sure the future cachers who come along will really appreciate it."

 

 

I've done that twice now. 'Worked both times.

 

When it comes down to it...their is nothing like being honest and polite with a property owner and not trying to "pull one past" them.

 

That was absolutely brilliant! Love it!

[+Harry Dolphin]

What was the question, again?

Who are the Cache Police, and how do I get appointed?

Should every cache that does not meet the guidelines be labelled with SBA?

What is the best way to educate this cacher to understanding the guidelines?

Tough set of questions with no answers.

Permission presumed or expressly given? I found the one at the community college that was expressly hidden by the faculty member with the permission of the college president! Nobody told the hired security who questioned me as to what I was doing. (Guess I'm too old to be presumed to be a college student seeking fun in the woods. Oh , well.)

Are you telling me that I should (and am, perhaps, required to) post SBA on every cache that I think (or know) does not meet the guidelines? The cup hooks in the hollow trees? The magic marker on the bridge? That would make me a lot of enemies!

Until TPTB request or require such things, I have declined to accept the role of Cache Police.

Assuming that OP is correct (and I see nothing to say that s/he is), having run into caches with express permission that others in power were unfamiliar with, the best answer I can come up with is #3 above: What is the best way to educate this cacher to understanding the guidelines? I have found caches hidden by 527 cache owners. Many of them I know. Most of them I do not know.

I have had some issues with caches that I have found. (Worse than mentioned above.) Generally, I have found that constructive criticism has not been well received. And, so, I have stopped offering help.

Perhaps OP might have more luck offering to help the cacher in question understand the guidelines. This would seem to be the best avenue for him or her to take.

[+briansnat]

I looked at this guy's placements. He definitely does have issues with coordinates and choice of spots. The Nebraska Governor's mansion?

[+Renegade Knight]

...Because we all know no one checks agreement boxes on internet sites without actually violating what they just agreed to...

 

If they have a question that's what the reviewer is for. People shouldn't be disuaded from making sure caches actually have permission if they have reason to believe that permission was maybe never granted.

 

Your stance is that we should assume people are not good at their word and so we should check up on everone as a result.

 

Don't put words in my mouth. Nothing I said even came close to that. If you want to contest what I said then contest it in context.

 

My point is simple: Checking a box that says "I agree that I have obtained permission" does not mean they actually did. True or false?

 

True.

 

Since you don't like what I thought you were saying, Then what exactly are you saying. Your take that not everone is honest means something. What it is?

[+Shriekback]

If there are any moderators reading, would it be ok to close this topic? It seems to be boiling down to an argument over semantics and I've already got the answer I was looking for.

[Keystone]

Closing thread at the OP's request.

 

An OP may ask for their thread to be closed by using the "Report this Post" feature.