Jump to content

Detrimental behavior that affects geocaching as a whole


Kit Fox

Recommended Posts

The point of this thread is bring up a topic that I feel strongly about.

 

The cancerous spread of selfishness, and the complete disregard for the rule of law (while geocaching) is negatively affecting geocaching whether we like it or not.

 

Examples

  1. Cachers who knowingly ignore posted rules to find caches in closed parks, so they can be FTF!
  2. Cachers who knowlingly place caches on public utilities without permission.
  3. Cachers who boast about their illegal activity in their web logs!
  4. Cachers who see landscaping and the natural environment as an impediment to finding the cache.

Please feel free to add to the "ever growing list." This topic is not intended for micro bashing, just to highlight trends that you feel are detrimental to our sport.

 

Gee, I thought we had been through all this before.

 

If we couldn't even begin to resolve one of the issues your bring up in 8 pages of forum posts how long will this one go on before it gets locked down.

 

Deane

AKA: DeRock & the Psychic Cacher - Grattan MI

 

I wasn't going to mention the "invasion" of parks after hours DeRock, but I guess it was right at the top of the list! Yes, it may seem innocent (and in many cases it might well be) to "sneak" into a closed park or cemetery (I've done this myself when I first started caching), but all it takes is ONE time to make problems for everyone!!

 

I had to archive several caches we placed in one of our favorite parks simply because there was easy access from outside the fee park (a cemetry to park in or even the side of the road). Most of the "visits" were during regular hours, but the fact that the grounds crew saw some of the "visitors" come in w/o paying made for BIG troubles for us at the time! LUCKILY, the manager of the park understands human nature and also the benefits of caching...I guess the benefits outweighed the "human nature" drawback!

Link to comment

"I wouldn't be surprised if it is a geocacher that eventually discovers the wreckage of Steve Fossett's plane."

 

I wouldn't be surprised if it is a hunter, hiker or private pilot that eventually discovers the wreckage of Steve Fossett's plane.

 

No pilot is likely to ever spot the plane or they would have done so during the search. I read a very interesting article about the search written by one of the searchers, seems it was conducted almost exclusivly from plane and off road vehicles with no one venturing more that a few feet from any road or trail. His plane is in a deep gully somewhere or scattered over a large area and only someone walking right up to it will ever find it.

Link to comment

Much ado about nothing.

Look at the big picture.

A few gay priests didn't bring down the churches

A few rogue truck drivers didn't kill the Teamsters

A few crooked lawyers didn't... well, they probably did

A few bad geocachers won't kill our game.

 

All we can do is take responsibility for ourselves and leave what we touch in life better than we found it and we won't have to worry about our image.

 

The people you need to refer to are called "pedophiles". Gay does not equal pedophile. Pedophiles are not exclusive to any one orientation. :P ...

Be careful when you correct the thoughts of others. Actively gay priests that ignore their vows are a very real problem. Certainly not as harmful as pedophilia, but important, none the less.

 

As to the rest of it, I see TAR's point. We will never be able to change every behavior that we disagree with. Also, I believe that these 'bad acts' are much fewer and typically less severe than the forum rants make them appear.

Edited by sbell111
Link to comment
What people need to realize is that no matter how rare the behavior might be, it only takes one to cause us problems if it comes to the attention of the wrong people.
This is exactly right and a lot of people don't seem to realize this.

 

I second (or is it third) this wholeheartedly. Some would say a few bad apples don't spoil the harvest...but we're not harvesting are we?

Link to comment

Much ado about nothing.

Look at the big picture.

A few gay priests didn't bring down the churches

A few rogue truck drivers didn't kill the Teamsters

A few crooked lawyers didn't... well, they probably did

A few bad geocachers won't kill our game.

 

All we can do is take responsibility for ourselves and leave what we touch in life better than we found it and we won't have to worry about our image.

 

The people you need to refer to are called "pedophiles". Gay does not equal pedophile. Pedophiles are not exclusive to any one orientation. :P ...

Be careful when you correct the thoughts of others. Actively gay priests that ignore their vows are a very real problem. Certainly not as harmful as pedophilia, but important, none the less.

 

As to the rest of it, I see TAR's point. We will never be able to change every behavior that we disagree with. Also, I believe that these 'bad acts' are much fewer and typically less severe than the forum rants make them appear.

I agree that these behaviours are for the most part rare and unusual and further that the quote is correct... these individuals did not "bring down the churches" or "kill the Teamsters", etc. But they DID do irreparable harm to those institutions and MORE IMPORTANTLY to the REPUTATIONS of those organisations.

 

One's reputation, both personally and corporately, is one's most valuable asset.

 

Unfortunately, reputations can be damaged or destroyed by actual despicable acts, rumors of despicable acts, accusations of despicable acts (whether true or not), acts and rumors thereof that are not quite "despicable" but nonetheless scandalous, and BY OSMOSIS from despicable or scandalous acts of others of the same "colour" as ones self.

 

Guarding one's corporate reputation is especially hard because so much of it is beyond one's own individual control. That is why it is important for us to "be in each others' business" about things like trespassing, ridiculously stupid cache placements that endanger or appear to endanger others, trampling the nasturtium beds, and a whole host of other indiscretions that reflect negatively on the sport as a whole.

Link to comment
What people need to realize is that no matter how rare the behavior might be, it only takes one to cause us problems if it comes to the attention of the wrong people.
This is exactly right and a lot of people don't seem to realize this.

 

I second (or is it third) this wholeheartedly. Some would say a few bad apples don't spoil the harvest...but we're not harvesting are we?

 

Too true. A cache had tons of finds, but it only took a couple groups not following directions to almost cause its archival. That was a more severe instance. Plenty of others had logged that they should have read the cache page and come in from the recommended direction. To that I can only sigh. What do you have to do, put up signs from the wrong direction saying "this ain't it, you're gonna get hurt or in trouble?" The info was there on the page in plain English, for the benefit of the cachers and the cache itself.

When that info is ignored, everything is at risk.

 

I'm starting to think my cache titles should be longer.

"Happy Hunt Cache - Do Not Access This Cache From Above, Please Drive Around To The Other Side, There Is a Parking Lot That Has Easy Access So You Don't Have To Risk Possible Injury to Yourself or Jeopardize This Cache Placement"

 

That probably wouldn't help either :P

Link to comment

Here's some detrimental behavior:

Police called to investigate cache behind Wal-Mart

 

I don't like big-box caches anyway. I didn't look into which cache this was. I wonder if it was just a magnetic skirt-lifter but the article would lead me to believe it was regular sized. I don't own any caches yet but I imagine it is really hard to place a regular sized cache in an urban muggle-active location. And get permission...but that was another thread.

 

most confusing quote:

"Rick McDonald, Plano Police spokesperson said individuals playing the game will receive some kind of reward based on the amount of navigation systems they find."

I haven't found any navigation systems yet but I'll be sure to get my reward from Mr. McDonald if I do :P

Link to comment

Much ado about nothing.

Look at the big picture.

A few gay priests didn't bring down the churches

A few rogue truck drivers didn't kill the Teamsters

A few crooked lawyers didn't... well, they probably did

A few bad geocachers won't kill our game.

 

All we can do is take responsibility for ourselves and leave what we touch in life better than we found it and we won't have to worry about our image.

 

The people you need to refer to are called "pedophiles". Gay does not equal pedophile. Pedophiles are not exclusive to any one orientation. :P ...

Be careful when you correct the thoughts of others. Actively gay priests that ignore their vows are a very real problem. Certainly not as harmful as pedophilia, but important, none the less.

 

As to the rest of it, I see TAR's point. We will never be able to change every behavior that we disagree with. Also, I believe that these 'bad acts' are much fewer and typically less severe than the forum rants make them appear.

 

Sexually active heterosexual priests that ignore their vows are a problem as well. I'm sure there are gay priests that have kept their vows, and have never harmed a child in their lives. The original statement quoted above does not differentiate between pedophile and gay. Again they are two different things.

 

I really don't think the OP even meant it to sound as biased as it did, but biased it was.

Link to comment

I think it is right to be concerned and take appropriate action to discourage inappropriate activity.

 

I think peer pressure is effective to discourage bad behavior in most folks.

 

As a manager and policy maker in business I learned a valuable lesson from a very smart boss. (Warning – made up statistics to follow – 90% of published statistics are made up on the spot).

 

He said roughly 20% of employees are character driven and excellent. They will set examples and work honestly with or without rules.

 

He said 5 to 10% are rotten apples and no amount of rules will prevent them from cheating or behaving badly.

 

The 70% or so of folks in the middle will likely follow the example of those that get rewarded. Your job is to encourage the middle group to follow the top group.

 

Don’t waste your time writing restrictive rules for the bottom 10% that end up punishing or insulting the middle group. Write your rules for the middle 70% and reward the top 10%. Warn the rotten apples until they change or you get the opportunity to fire them - they will give you plenty of opportunities to fire them.

 

We have had graffiti and vandalism as long as we have had civilization. These problems are not unique to GeoCaching. While we can't drive them out we can minimize the effects.

 

I think my old boss’s advice applies to the concerns expressed by the Original Poster. We can’t fire rude and disruptive cachers, but we can discourage bad behavior and encourage responsible behavior.

 

I think it is proper to raise these issues and discuss them on this forum. Doing so educates newer cachers like me and provides cautionary guidance to us to help steer us to the proper behavior in this sport/obsession/game.

 

Paraphrased quote "All it takes for for evil to prevail is for good folks to remain silent."

Link to comment

Don’t waste your time writing restrictive rules for the bottom 10% that end up punishing or insulting the middle group. Write your rules for the middle 70% and reward the top 10%. Warn the rotten apples until they change or you get the opportunity to fire them - they will give you plenty of opportunities to fire them.

I only wish politicians and property managers could figure this out.

 

They have not learned this in the entire history of mankind and they probably will not learn it any time soon.

 

That is why we MUST police ourselves if we are to survive. If the government and/or land managers do it, the GOOD will be restricted (punished) and the bad will carry on as before, undaunted.

Link to comment
I think it is right to be concerned and take appropriate action to discourage inappropriate activity.

 

I think peer pressure is effective to discourage bad behavior in most folks.

 

As a manager and policy maker in business I learned a valuable lesson from a very smart boss. (Warning – made up statistics to follow – 90% of published statistics are made up on the spot).

 

He said roughly 20% of employees are character driven and excellent. They will set examples and work honestly with or without rules.

 

He said 5 to 10% are rotten apples and no amount of rules will prevent them from cheating or behaving badly.

 

The 70% or so of folks in the middle will likely follow the example of those that get rewarded. Your job is to encourage the middle group to follow the top group.

 

Don't waste your time writing restrictive rules for the bottom 10% that end up punishing or insulting the middle group. Write your rules for the middle 70% and reward the top 10%. Warn the rotten apples until they change or you get the opportunity to fire them - they will give you plenty of opportunities to fire them.

 

We have had graffiti and vandalism as long as we have had civilization. These problems are not unique to GeoCaching. While we can't drive them out we can minimize the effects.

 

I think my old boss's advice applies to the concerns expressed by the Original Poster. We can't fire rude and disruptive cachers, but we can discourage bad behavior and encourage responsible behavior.

 

I think it is proper to raise these issues and discuss them on this forum. Doing so educates newer cachers like me and provides cautionary guidance to us to help steer us to the proper behavior in this sport/obsession/game.

 

Paraphrased quote "All it takes for for evil to prevail is for good folks to remain silent."

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." -Edmund Burke

 

That's one of my favorite quotes and I agree with you. :P

Link to comment

Perhaps we should add a fifth choice

5) cachers the place caches in violation of the guidlines for placing a cache.

 

or a sixth choice

 

6) cachers that deliberately avoid getting permission at all costs for fear of rejection

 

better yet, replace #2 with that since it covers that scenario and others...

Edited by egami
Link to comment
I think it is right to be concerned and take appropriate action to discourage inappropriate activity.

 

Paraphrased quote "All it takes for for evil to prevail is for good folks to remain silent."

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." -Edmund Burke

 

That's one of my favorite quotes and I agree with you. :P

Thank you - for refreshing my memory. Yes, Edmund Burke.

Link to comment

 

Wouldn't #4 kinda be a good thing? :P

 

I'll clarify better, I was referring to cachers who destroy flower beds in parks, and those that kick, and rip out all the bushes near ground zero, in pursuit of a geocache. Broken sprinklers are becoming more common because cachers assumes that the cache "must be a sprinkler head."

 

From personal experiance I've found that a lot of this bad behavior originates from either the cache owner or hunter or both not understand the cache difficulty rating. I've initially DNFed a cache hidden in a converted sprinkler head because the difficulty was rated one star. I put the cache on my watch list and after reading a few find logs I quickly realized that this was NOT a one star difficulty cache. I've also gone to an appropriately rated one star difficulty cache where the cache was a magnet key holder under a park bench and saw a hole in the ground nearby. After inspecting it I realized that it was a sprinkler with the insides removed. I wondered if that sprinkler head was the victim of a lawn mower or a geocacher.

Link to comment

"I wouldn't be surprised if it is a geocacher that eventually discovers the wreckage of Steve Fossett's plane."

 

I wouldn't be surprised if it is a hunter, hiker or private pilot that eventually discovers the wreckage of Steve Fossett's plane.

 

No pilot is likely to ever spot the plane or they would have done so during the search. I read a very interesting article about the search written by one of the searchers, seems it was conducted almost exclusivly from plane and off road vehicles with no one venturing more that a few feet from any road or trail. His plane is in a deep gully somewhere or scattered over a large area and only someone walking right up to it will ever find it.

 

I stand corrected. It will be a geocacher. All is well with the world once again.

Link to comment

Rogue geocachers spreading out across the land.

Oh , the humanity.

 

440 Caches are currently being removed from Anza-Borrego Desert State Park Because of "Rogue Geocachers."

 

Another geocacher contacted the superintendant, and i've got a copy of his reply. All physical caches are being removed and the only cache type being allowed is Earthcaches, with explicit approval. Actions of a few might not affect your area yet.

 

A few quotes from the superintendant:

 

(1)In Anza-Borrego, with 70% of the area designated as State Wilderness, it is most appropriate to transition to virtual caches, rather than have ammo cans and tupperwares in the wild areas.

 

(2)Well, the law on littering is probably most appropriate. Even geocaching.com’s own written policy supposedly claims that cachers need to get permission from landowners before placing a cache. As you say, the behind the scenes “little secret” is that many cachers place geocaches wherever they want and let the landowner deal with it later, or not at all. Well, here in Anza-Borrego we are dealing with it. The magnitude calls for a clean-up. The notice went out a month ago, and geocachers have been issued a notice to retrieve there boxes from park lands.

 

(3) I have been here in Anza-Borrego for thirty-three years and have never once had an official request to place a geocache in this park. One of the District seasonal archeologists worked to minimize the impacts of geocaches on cultural sites, but authorization was never obtained to place caches in Anza-Borrego. “Tacit Approval” or “No one ever told us we couldn’t do it” does not constitute permission.

 

(4)And what happened to the saying, “Leave it better than you found it”? We usually do not clear out what appears to possibly be a historic dump site. I can assure you my staff and I pick up many tons of litter, trash, and abandoned couches, refrigerators, pianos, and washing machines every season out here.

 

5. Have any cachers even tried to work with the park yet to get a policy?

 

Not until the past month, after I sent a notice to geocaching.com to request removal of the 440 documented geocaches, and the hundreds of others which no doubt exist but are on other websites or pirate sites.

Link to comment

Rogue geocachers spreading out across the land.

Oh , the humanity.

 

440 Caches are currently being removed from Anza-Borrego Desert State Park Because of "Rogue Geocachers."

 

Another geocacher contacted the superintendant, and i've got a copy of his reply. All physical caches are being removed and the only cache type being allowed is Earthcaches, with explicit approval. Actions of a few might not affect your area yet.

 

A few quotes from the superintendant:

 

(1)In Anza-Borrego, with 70% of the area designated as State Wilderness, it is most appropriate to transition to virtual caches, rather than have ammo cans and tupperwares in the wild areas.

 

(2)Well, the law on littering is probably most appropriate. Even geocaching.com’s own written policy supposedly claims that cachers need to get permission from landowners before placing a cache. As you say, the behind the scenes “little secret” is that many cachers place geocaches wherever they want and let the landowner deal with it later, or not at all. Well, here in Anza-Borrego we are dealing with it. The magnitude calls for a clean-up. The notice went out a month ago, and geocachers have been issued a notice to retrieve there boxes from park lands.

 

(3) I have been here in Anza-Borrego for thirty-three years and have never once had an official request to place a geocache in this park. One of the District seasonal archeologists worked to minimize the impacts of geocaches on cultural sites, but authorization was never obtained to place caches in Anza-Borrego. “Tacit Approval” or “No one ever told us we couldn’t do it” does not constitute permission.

 

(4)And what happened to the saying, “Leave it better than you found it”? We usually do not clear out what appears to possibly be a historic dump site. I can assure you my staff and I pick up many tons of litter, trash, and abandoned couches, refrigerators, pianos, and washing machines every season out here.

 

5. Have any cachers even tried to work with the park yet to get a policy?

 

Not until the past month, after I sent a notice to geocaching.com to request removal of the 440 documented geocaches, and the hundreds of others which no doubt exist but are on other websites or pirate sites.

 

Some things on that.

1) Wilderness is a land use designation. Nothing more. Allowable land uses are a matter of public policy and not automatically "no use at all". Caches may fit like a glove with actual policy. It depends on what's allowed.

2) Caches are not litter by most laws I've ever read. They are not abandoned property either in that they are not abandoned. However the way the law is normally written they can be treated as abandoned property by most land owners. It's convenient for the park to treat them like litter rather than as abandoned property because abandoned property laws require a certain amount of effort by park staff. Litter can just be thrown away. Ignoring the law out of convience is quite frankly wrong.

3) The thread on this referenced a policy and caches being placed in accordance with that policy being removed. Most cultural sites are a non issue. Hikers, hunters, photographers, fisherman, and other recreational users do their activities in on and among these sites unaware as is intended.

4) I'm not sure the point with that quote. It covers to many opposing concepts.

 

Given the original policy, the lack of effort to treat the caches as abandoned property as required by law, and the attitude of the superintendent (see the comment on groundspeaks 'supposed policy'.) 440 caches are being removed by a rogue superintendent and not because of rogue cachers. Sometimes the bad behavior is not that of cachers.

Edited by Renegade Knight
Link to comment

Rogue geocachers spreading out across the land.

Oh , the humanity.

 

440 Caches are currently being removed from Anza-Borrego Desert State Park Because of "Rogue Geocachers."

 

Another geocacher contacted the superintendant, and i've got a copy of his reply. All physical caches are being removed and the only cache type being allowed is Earthcaches, with explicit approval. Actions of a few might not affect your area yet.

 

A few quotes from the superintendant:

 

(1)In Anza-Borrego, with 70% of the area designated as State Wilderness, it is most appropriate to transition to virtual caches, rather than have ammo cans and tupperwares in the wild areas.

 

(2)Well, the law on littering is probably most appropriate. Even geocaching.com’s own written policy supposedly claims that cachers need to get permission from landowners before placing a cache. As you say, the behind the scenes “little secret” is that many cachers place geocaches wherever they want and let the landowner deal with it later, or not at all. Well, here in Anza-Borrego we are dealing with it. The magnitude calls for a clean-up. The notice went out a month ago, and geocachers have been issued a notice to retrieve there boxes from park lands.

 

(3) I have been here in Anza-Borrego for thirty-three years and have never once had an official request to place a geocache in this park. One of the District seasonal archeologists worked to minimize the impacts of geocaches on cultural sites, but authorization was never obtained to place caches in Anza-Borrego. “Tacit Approval” or “No one ever told us we couldn’t do it” does not constitute permission.

 

(4)And what happened to the saying, “Leave it better than you found it”? We usually do not clear out what appears to possibly be a historic dump site. I can assure you my staff and I pick up many tons of litter, trash, and abandoned couches, refrigerators, pianos, and washing machines every season out here.

 

5. Have any cachers even tried to work with the park yet to get a policy?

 

Not until the past month, after I sent a notice to geocaching.com to request removal of the 440 documented geocaches, and the hundreds of others which no doubt exist but are on other websites or pirate sites.

 

Whoa...

 

Have you shared this information with the folks involved in the situation at Anza-Borrego? I haven't seen any of this shared in the thread you mentioned. And I went to double check just to make sure my memory wasn't failing me. I hope I am wrong, but I have all sorts of red flags going up right now.

Link to comment

440 Caches are currently being removed from Anza-Borrego Desert State Park Because of "Rogue Geocachers."

They were not "rogue geocachers." they were geocachers following GC guidelines and the conditions for the approval of caches were changed without notice by the property manager who, in your quote, says he has managed the park for 30 years. In that time, over a period of several years, he has ALLOWED 440 geocaches to be placed without a word. When he changed HIS policy, the caches were archived and removal began.

 

i agree with RK:

440 caches are being removed by a rogue superintendent and not because of rogue cachers. Sometimes the bad behavior is not that of cachers.
Link to comment

Rogue geocachers spreading out across the land.

Oh , the humanity.

This attitude shows exactly what we're up against. What RW...you don't think there's a problem??

 

Yes, I think there are problems but anything to do with geocaching is low on the list of what I worry about.

Edited by rlridgeway
Link to comment

440 Caches are currently being removed from Anza-Borrego Desert State Park Because of "Rogue Geocachers."

They were not "rogue geocachers." they were geocachers following GC guidelines and the conditions for the approval of caches were changed without notice by the property manager who, in your quote, says he has managed the park for 30 years. In that time, over a period of several years, he has ALLOWED 440 geocaches to be placed without a word. When he changed HIS policy, the caches were archived and removal began.

 

i agree with RK:

440 caches are being removed by a rogue superintendent and not because of rogue cachers. Sometimes the bad behavior is not that of cachers.

 

I should have clarified my response. :) I never meant to lump all the geocachers who placed geocaches as being "rogue geocachers." I was only referring to a few "bad apples" who drew attention to themselves, and their hides, which caused the rangers (directed by the Supt.) to remove all the caches.

 

Sorry about that. :)

Link to comment

Rogue geocachers spreading out across the land.

Oh , the humanity.

This attitude shows exactly what we're up against. What RW...you don't think there's a problem??

 

Yes, I think there are problems but anything to do with geocaching is low on the list of what I worry about.

And that helps this sport...how? Truly, if you have nothing to add, why post? And if caching is of little importance to you, why do you bother caching?

 

Sorry, bad mood today...family health and such.

 

BUT, this is a topic about the problems we face and what can be done. Caching means much to me, it gives me quality time with my son KAboom, it gets me out into the wild, helps me to forget about life even if only a short time... To see some poo poo the problems or just act as if it's bunk...well...

Edited by Rockin Roddy
Link to comment

The point of this thread is bring up a topic that I feel strongly about.

 

[*]Cachers who knowingly ignore posted rules to find caches in closed parks, so they can be FTF!

[*]Cachers who knowlingly place caches on public utilities without permission.

[*]Cachers who boast about their illegal activity in their web logs!

[*]Cachers who see landscaping and the natural environment as an impediment to finding the cache.

 

 

My bad I already broke rule #1 and rule #3. Hopefully the owner sees my log and removes the 24/7 attribute from the description. It wasn't so much a boast as it was a note for others to see so they can choose to avoid it at certain hours. It was a wonderful time to enjoy the park however.

 

I guess a problem I have noticed is placing caches in parks that are actually for residents only. The one or two times I have come across this, it was not mentioned in the cache description either. I did however, take my chances with the long arm of the law and found the cache. I couldn't tell you if the cache owner got permission for placing the cache by the local authorities. That would be a conundrum - to have the permission to place the cache but for it to be against the law for most cachers to find it.

 

I never understood this concept. In my area, public parks are public. In the Cleveland area, when I was going to college, it seemed like every little suburb around Cleveland had signs saying their public parks weren't for the public - they were only for residents. The logic behind this completely escapes me - how can you have a public park, paid for and maintained by public funds, but limited in use to the people who happen to live in that specific municipality?

Link to comment

Rogue geocachers spreading out across the land.

Oh , the humanity.

This attitude shows exactly what we're up against. What RW...you don't think there's a problem??

 

Yes, I think there are problems but anything to do with geocaching is low on the list of what I worry about.

And that helps this sport...how? Truly, if you have nothing to add, why post? And if caching is of little importance to you, why do you bother caching?

 

Sorry, bad mood today...family health and such.

 

BUT, this is a topic about the problems we face and what can be done. Caching means much to me, it gives me quality time with my son KAboom, it gets me out into the wild, helps me to forget about life even if only a short time... To see some poo poo the problems or just act as if it's bunk...well...

 

The sport of geocaching is just fine. There's only like, a gazillion cashes listed and a very small percentage of geocachers do bad things.

Link to comment

The logic behind this completely escapes me - how can you have a public park, paid for and maintained by public funds, but limited in use to the people who happen to live in that specific municipality?

Just a guess, but perhaps the communities in question were not municipalities but private developments (condos) whose homeowners' associations paid for the parks?

Link to comment

The logic behind this completely escapes me - how can you have a public park, paid for and maintained by public funds, but limited in use to the people who happen to live in that specific municipality?

Just a guess, but perhaps the communities in question were not municipalities but private developments (condos) whose homeowners' associations paid for the parks?

 

Nope - they're specifically listed as "Such-and-such Community Park" - They have some strange rules around there - like there are a couple of those suburbs which have made it illegal to eat in your car. I'm not kidding - they have signs posted near some fast food establishments citing the law!

Link to comment

The sport of geocaching is just fine. There's only like, a gazillion cashes listed and a very small percentage of geocachers do bad things.

That's like saying "it's only a little, tiny brush fire in a great BIG forest... don't bother me with such small matters." *whistling a merry tune*... HOLY SHEETS! SOMEBODY SAVE MY HOUSE!

Link to comment

The point of this thread is bring up a topic that I feel strongly about.

 

[*]Cachers who knowingly ignore posted rules to find caches in closed parks, so they can be FTF!

[*]Cachers who knowlingly place caches on public utilities without permission.

[*]Cachers who boast about their illegal activity in their web logs!

[*]Cachers who see landscaping and the natural environment as an impediment to finding the cache.

 

 

My bad I already broke rule #1 and rule #3. Hopefully the owner sees my log and removes the 24/7 attribute from the description. It wasn't so much a boast as it was a note for others to see so they can choose to avoid it at certain hours. It was a wonderful time to enjoy the park however.

 

I guess a problem I have noticed is placing caches in parks that are actually for residents only. The one or two times I have come across this, it was not mentioned in the cache description either. I did however, take my chances with the long arm of the law and found the cache. I couldn't tell you if the cache owner got permission for placing the cache by the local authorities. That would be a conundrum - to have the permission to place the cache but for it to be against the law for most cachers to find it.

 

I never understood this concept. In my area, public parks are public. In the Cleveland area, when I was going to college, it seemed like every little suburb around Cleveland had signs saying their public parks weren't for the public - they were only for residents. The logic behind this completely escapes me - how can you have a public park, paid for and maintained by public funds, but limited in use to the people who happen to live in that specific municipality?

 

If this issue was THAT important, one must wonder why you didn't bother to make a simple inquiry while you were there.

Link to comment
It sure seems like your trolling for a fight (like you always do).

 

LOL....What? Am I getting a reputation? Ok, I do sometimes like to play devil's advocate...but I'm really not trying to fight. :)

 

You completely missed my point. The majority of urban caches are hidden without the knowledge or permission of the property owners. Since these areas are not managed by land managers, caching continues with little oversight. I was not making judgement on urban micros, just stating a fact that they rarely get affected by geocaching bans.

 

I see your point. It just seemed that you assumed that the poster didn't agree with your initial post, it MUST be because he promarily likes micros. There could be other reasons for disagreement.

 

For example, a lot of people say "this [insert anything] will give geocaching a bad name." I guess because I don't see it in my local area, or it's such a small minority of caches, I don't think about it, and don't see a problem.

 

Here in AZ, we also have many land management agencies that already have geocaching policies and are very receptive to caching.

 

I guess we probably all overgeneralize things we see in our local area to the whole world of geo caching.

 

(And for full disclsure, 3/5 of the caches I have placed require at least a 1 mile hike (Two of them placed at the top of the "mountains" we have around here.....just so you don't think I'm a micro lover!! :) )

Link to comment

The logic behind this completely escapes me - how can you have a public park, paid for and maintained by public funds, but limited in use to the people who happen to live in that specific municipality?

Just a guess, but perhaps the communities in question were not municipalities but private developments (condos) whose homeowners' associations paid for the parks?

 

Nope - they're specifically listed as "Such-and-such Community Park" - They have some strange rules around there - like there are a couple of those suburbs which have made it illegal to eat in your car. I'm not kidding - they have signs posted near some fast food establishments citing the law!

 

Sounds like a great 'burb in which to reside.

Link to comment

Rogue geocachers spreading out across the land.

Oh , the humanity.

This attitude shows exactly what we're up against. What RW...you don't think there's a problem??

 

Yes, I think there are problems but anything to do with geocaching is low on the list of what I worry about.

And that helps this sport...how? Truly, if you have nothing to add, why post? And if caching is of little importance to you, why do you bother caching?

 

Sorry, bad mood today...family health and such.

 

BUT, this is a topic about the problems we face and what can be done. Caching means much to me, it gives me quality time with my son KAboom, it gets me out into the wild, helps me to forget about life even if only a short time... To see some poo poo the problems or just act as if it's bunk...well...

 

The sport of geocaching is just fine. There's only like, a gazillion cashes listed and a very small percentage of geocachers do bad things.

 

Well, which is it? Is there a problem or not? You see, if you read the whole topic, you'll note that it only TAKES "a small percentage" of cachers to get caching banned. Turning a blind eye to the problems and saying it's only a SMALL problem doesn't really do much good.

 

We all should be trying to protect our sport, or we won't have a sport to protect.

Link to comment

 

If this issue was THAT important, one must wonder why you didn't bother to make a simple inquiry while you were there.

 

I never said it was that important. I found it wierd, considering it to be a completely different mindset in the idea of public parks from the area I am used to. Wonder all you want. I simply pointed out an interesting belief on the concept of "public" park.

 

 

Sounds like a great 'burb in which to reside.

 

Yeah - those hooligans eating and drinking in their cars are creating a major detriment to society... I'll have to remember that when racing from one committment to the next and munching on a snack to keep from being hungry until I have time for my next sit down, in my house, meal.

Edited by FireRef
Link to comment

The logic behind this completely escapes me - how can you have a public park, paid for and maintained by public funds, but limited in use to the people who happen to live in that specific municipality?

Just a guess, but perhaps the communities in question were not municipalities but private developments (condos) whose homeowners' associations paid for the parks?

 

Nope - they're specifically listed as "Such-and-such Community Park" - They have some strange rules around there - like there are a couple of those suburbs which have made it illegal to eat in your car. I'm not kidding - they have signs posted near some fast food establishments citing the law!

 

I know there are some small "town" beaches in this area that only allow residents from that town to use them. The town, ie. the town tax payers, pay for the upkeep. I suppose the logic is that the beach could get incredibly over crowded if people from all the surrounding towns and cities were to swoop in. I understand their point on the one hand, but also think it kinda bites on the other. :) Geocaches, obviously could not be placed in these areas. :)

 

Making it illegal to eat in your car just dumbfounds me! What is the point? As dog owners, we often eat in our car when we're out and about. They won't allow the dog in the restaurant, or allow the owners to eat in the car? We'd be avoiding those towns as much as possible!

Link to comment
It sure seems like your trolling for a fight (like you always do).

 

LOL....What? Am I getting a reputation? Ok, I do sometimes like to play devil's advocate...but I'm really not trying to fight. :)

 

You completely missed my point. The majority of urban caches are hidden without the knowledge or permission of the property owners. Since these areas are not managed by land managers, caching continues with little oversight. I was not making judgement on urban micros, just stating a fact that they rarely get affected by geocaching bans.

 

I see your point. It just seemed that you assumed that the poster didn't agree with your initial post, it MUST be because he promarily likes micros. There could be other reasons for disagreement.

 

For example, a lot of people say "this [insert anything] will give geocaching a bad name." I guess because I don't see it in my local area, or it's such a small minority of caches, I don't think about it, and don't see a problem.

 

Here in AZ, we also have many land management agencies that already have geocaching policies and are very receptive to caching.

 

I guess we probably all overgeneralize things we see in our local area to the whole world of geo caching.

 

(And for full disclsure, 3/5 of the caches I have placed require at least a 1 mile hike (Two of them placed at the top of the "mountains" we have around here.....just so you don't think I'm a micro lover!! :) )

 

What are you saying here?? Do you think caching is safe in your area simply because there's an agreement (or policy) in place? I THINK there was at that park TrailGators has been talking about...WAS! Do you honestly think that the policy you speak of will be in place forever?? All it takes is ONE problem to make ripples...and ripples become waves REALLY easy. Once they're waves, it might turn into an unstoppable tsunami...one which COULD wipe that policy right off the books!

 

Don't get me wrong, it's GREAT you have policies (MiGO has an agreement with our DNR so we can use our State Parks), but we should ALL be working to protect our sport!

Link to comment

The sport of geocaching is just fine. There's only like, a gazillion cashes listed and a very small percentage of geocachers do bad things.

That's like saying "it's only a little, tiny brush fire in a great BIG forest...

 

Your analogy is an overexeration. Its really not like a brush fire at all

 

Well, which is it? Is there a problem or not?

 

Its not a problem or at least compared to the other problems we all face.

Link to comment

The sport of geocaching is just fine. There's only like, a gazillion cashes listed and a very small percentage of geocachers do bad things.

That's like saying "it's only a little, tiny brush fire in a great BIG forest...

 

Your analogy is an overexeration. Its really not like a brush fire at all

 

Well, which is it? Is there a problem or not?

 

Its not a problem or at least compared to the other problems we all face.

The brush fire analogy is that little problems tend to become bigger problems if they are not dealt with when they are little.

 

Can you give a reason that my analogy is flawed or do you think simply dismissing it without further comment gives credence to your lackadaisical stand on the issue? In my reasoning, your simple dismissal of the analogy without explanation to justify it actually reinforces the analogy.

Link to comment

The point of this thread is bring up a topic that I feel strongly about.

 

The cancerous spread of selfishness, and the complete disregard for the rule of law (while geocaching) is negatively affecting geocaching whether we like it or not.

 

Examples

  1. Cachers who knowingly ignore posted rules to find caches in closed parks, so they can be FTF!
  2. Cachers who knowlingly place caches on public utilities without permission.
  3. Cachers who boast about their illegal activity in their web logs!
  4. Cachers who see landscaping and the natural environment as an impediment to finding the cache.

Please feel free to add to the "ever growing list." This topic is not intended for micro bashing, just to highlight trends that you feel are detrimental to our sport.

 

If they asked everyone for identification it would greatly cut down on a lot of that. The system only asks for a name and doesnt verify it. Geocaching evolved as a anonymous activity mostly under the radar. I dont think there would be any caches hidden inside electrical boxes (for example) if the hider knew that the electric company could find out their name somehow if the cache was discovered by a utility worker.

It would, however, probably cause a reduction in all hides for awhile, but at least cachers would be more responsible and think about their actions and possible consequences.

Link to comment

The logic behind this completely escapes me - how can you have a public park, paid for and maintained by public funds, but limited in use to the people who happen to live in that specific municipality?

Just a guess, but perhaps the communities in question were not municipalities but private developments (condos) whose homeowners' associations paid for the parks?

 

Nope - they're specifically listed as "Such-and-such Community Park" - They have some strange rules around there - like there are a couple of those suburbs which have made it illegal to eat in your car. I'm not kidding - they have signs posted near some fast food establishments citing the law!

 

I know there are some small "town" beaches in this area that only allow residents from that town to use them. The town, ie. the town tax payers, pay for the upkeep. I suppose the logic is that the beach could get incredibly over crowded if people from all the surrounding towns and cities were to swoop in. I understand their point on the one hand, but also think it kinda bites on the other. :) Geocaches, obviously could not be placed in these areas. :)

 

Making it illegal to eat in your car just dumbfounds me! What is the point? As dog owners, we often eat in our car when we're out and about. They won't allow the dog in the restaurant, or allow the owners to eat in the car? We'd be avoiding those towns as much as possible!

 

"We'd be avoiding those towns as much as possible!" Uh, yeah, I think that that's the general idea.

 

Gotta love it.

Link to comment

If they asked everyone for identification it would greatly cut down on a lot of that. The system only asks for a name and doesnt verify it. Geocaching evolved as a anonymous activity mostly under the radar. I dont think there would be any caches hidden inside electrical boxes (for example) if the hider knew that the electric company could find out their name somehow if the cache was discovered by a utility worker.

It would, however, probably cause a reduction in all hides for awhile, but at least cachers would be more responsible and think about their actions and possible consequences.

 

Verifying users' identity when signing up for an account would add a huge amount of work to the process, as unless one physically verified a potential users' documents, those who wished to remain unknown could easily circumvent whatever system is used.

 

In reality, anonymity on the internet is just an illusion. Anyone can be traced if there is good reason to trace them.

 

I don't know how commonly that is known, but assuming it is, it hasn't stopped people who want to do stupid from doing stupid so far. Verification of users' identities would do little to stop those who wish to be detrimental and would only place an unnecessary burden on the honest users and TPTB.

 

I refer back to post #62:

Don’t waste your time writing restrictive rules for the bottom 10% that end up punishing or insulting the middle group. Write your rules for the middle 70% and reward the top 10%. Warn the rotten apples until they change or you get the opportunity to fire them - they will give you plenty of opportunities to fire them.
Link to comment

 

Verifying users' identity when signing up for an account would add a huge amount of work to the process, as unless one physically verified a potential users' documents, those who wished to remain unknown could easily circumvent whatever system is used.

 

In reality, anonymity on the internet is just an illusion. Anyone can be traced if there is good reason to trace them.

 

I don't know how commonly that is known, but assuming it is, it hasn't stopped people who want to do stupid from doing stupid so far. Verification of users' identities would do little to stop those who wish to be detrimental and would only place an unnecessary burden on the honest users and TPTB.

 

It would be a burden, but in the long run I think it would be worth it.

 

I refer back to post #62:
Don’t waste your time writing restrictive rules for the bottom 10% that end up punishing or insulting the middle group. Write your rules for the middle 70% and reward the top 10%. Warn the rotten apples until they change or you get the opportunity to fire them - they will give you plenty of opportunities to fire them.

 

and I agree with that also, but it doesnt seem that restrictive or a burden to me (as a cacher) I can send in my info. The burden is on TPTB, but whether it would be unneccesary is the question. In the long run, I think it's better, but thats just an opinion. It would definitely go a long way in preventing such behavior.

In the early days of the automobile there was no license plates, and I can imagine that if they never had instituted them, things would be a lot different..

Link to comment

440 Caches are currently being removed from Anza-Borrego Desert State Park Because of "Rogue Geocachers."

They were not "rogue geocachers." they were geocachers following GC guidelines and the conditions for the approval of caches were changed without notice by the property manager who, in your quote, says he has managed the park for 30 years. In that time, over a period of several years, he has ALLOWED 440 geocaches to be placed without a word. When he changed HIS policy, the caches were archived and removal began.

 

i agree with RK:

440 caches are being removed by a rogue superintendent and not because of rogue cachers. Sometimes the bad behavior is not that of cachers.

 

I should have clarified my response. :) I never meant to lump all the geocachers who placed geocaches as being "rogue geocachers." I was only referring to a few "bad apples" who drew attention to themselves, and their hides, which caused the rangers (directed by the Supt.) to remove all the caches.

 

Sorry about that. :)

I never heard what actually triggered the sudden change of heart by the ABDSP rangers. It wouldn't surprise me if it was something stupid, but I'd like to hear exactly what it was. So if you've heard specifics (GC numbers) and not sweeping generalities please tell us. :) Edited by TrailGators
Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...