1-report a missing cache 2-report a dangerous cache

[+novw.nl]

I tried finding an answer to these but failed:

 

1- if I find a vandalized cache, do I simply report to the owner through "needs maintenance" log ?

 

2- I found a cache that, in my opinion, is in a dangerous location, I reported this in my log entry, now the owner does not agree with my observation, and seems "annoyed". I still think the cache is dangerously located. Now what ? Should (can) I take more action ?

[+BlueDeuce]

1. yes

 

2. Depends. There are a lot of places that are 'dangerous', such as a river. Talk to your local reviewer and get their opinion.

[Motorcycle_Mama]

Yeah, dangerous in what way?

[+BlueDeuce]

And I agree with the cache owner "The geocacher should be aware of his own limitations..."

 

GC19WT7

[+novw.nl]

In my opinion (note: Dutch = flatland) this location is too close to (actually on) the side of a mountain. If a searcher slips, he/she will drop straight (!) down for 20 meters (thats 50 feet...) I will get pictures from the cam in a day or so. We have just come home from vacation.

[Motorcycle_Mama]

Yeah, I would tend to agree with the cache owner (with the disclaimer that I obviously haven't seen the cache site).

 

Terrain difficulty does not equal dangerous. It's supposed to be hard. The hard is what makes it great. If it wasn't hard, everyone would do it.

 

Know your own limitations. If you think a cache is beyond your limitations, feel free to skip it and go on to the next one. No harm ... no foul.

[+novw.nl]

(Talking about gc19wwa by the way)

 

pics:

 

looking up, the edge is about 10 meters up:

 

looking down. the road is about 20 meters down:

 

And I fully agree with do not try when you are unsure, but (!) the original cachpage does not state any problems. And you really have to drive there. It is not like a whole pile of caches next to each other. The cache states difficulty one star and terrain 2. Now I do not know what difficulty 5 stars is supposed to be (1000 ft down under the arctic ? ), but some warning should (could ?) be given.

[+BlueDeuce]

And I agree with the cache owner "The geocacher should be aware of his own limitations..."

 

GC19WT7

 

Oh, you posted your particular concerns on two caches.

 

GC19WWA

[+JohnnyVegas]

I looked at both listings, I see nothing wrong with them at all as far as any danger issues. The reason there is a terrain rating is to address the nature of the cache and what may be involved it making the find. If a cacher does not want to do a cache that my be dangerous the cacher should only do caches that are rated 1 or 2 for terrain. We have lots of Rattle snakes were I live and I do see them from time to time, I saw one just a few days ago. Should all the caches in this area be rated hight for terrain because of all the snakes, of course not. The steel from Clint Eastwood in Magnum force, "A man has got to know his limitations" or some thing like that.

The same can be said of geocachers "A geocacher had got to know his limitaions"

 

I do have a problem with this cache GC19WWA, it is a new cache with a wave file attached. I guess they are allowing that nonsense again.

[+KoosKoos]

(Talking about gc19wwa by the way)

 

pics:

 

looking up, the edge is about 10 meters up:

 

looking down. the road is about 20 meters down:

 

And I fully agree with do not try when you are unsure, but (!) the original cachpage does not state any problems. And you really have to drive there. It is not like a whole pile of caches next to each other. The cache states difficulty one star and terrain 2. Now I do not know what difficulty 5 stars is supposed to be (1000 ft down under the arctic ? ), but some warning should (could ?) be given.

 

I agree that this one probably isn't a terrain 2 if it requires you to go out to the edge. If the cache is simply NEAR the edge, then I see absolutely nothing dangerous about it. There are plenty of dangers in the woods that have nothing to do with geocaching and each cacher needs to choose to accept those or not. I've done much steeper climbs for caches (below 5* ones which require equipment).

 

edit: pulled out the pics

Edited March 21, 2008 by KoosKoos

[+hairball45]

It's up to the cache hunter to know his or her limitations. Look it over, it it looks like it exceeds your capabilities get back in the car and go. Discounting scuba caches and caches requiring climbing gear, I would likely take it as a challenge to test or even expand my capabilities. I've fought back my personal fear of high places to grab a few. I'm still here. I know that I'm not much of a swimmer so I'll never go for one under water (well not if you have to dive to get it anyway) but I did buy a little inflatable kayak to go after a few caches accessable only by boat or walking out on the ice. No fear of boats. It's up to the individual to determine what he can do.

hairball

[cliff_hanger]

I tried finding an answer to these but failed:

 

1- if I find a vandalized cache, do I simply report to the owner through "needs maintenance" log ?

 

Yes

 

2- I found a cache that, in my opinion, is in a dangerous location, I reported this in my log entry, now the owner does not agree with my observation, and seems "annoyed". I still think the cache is dangerously located. Now what ? Should (can) I take more action ?

 

No more action. Your log is enough unless you want a rep as the Cache Police.

Some caches are wheelchair accessible. Some are extreme and you need to rappel/boat/dive to retrieve them. Sounds like this one is something inbetween. IMO, you should move on and let the folks that enjoy that type of cache, enjoy it.

 

Wanna see an example? Compare my log with Outdoors Lady's log for this cache Ledge of Doom

[+novw.nl]

 

Wanna see an example? Compare my log with Outdoors Lady's log for this cache Ledge of Doom

 

Now that's a 5 star I have edited the log I made. Less shouting, and simply stating an opinion.

 

Thanks all.

[+briansnat]

I found a cache that, in my opinion, is in a dangerous location, I reported this in my log entry, now the owner does not agree with my observation, and seems "annoyed". I still think the cache is dangerously located. Now what ? Should (can) I take more action ?

 

There really is no prohibition regarding caches in dangerous locations. We have caches on the sides of cliffs, on abandoned RR trestles, at the bottom of the ocean, high up trees, near ledges, in abandoned mines and in rattlesnake country.

 

Geocachers participate at their own risk and need to use their judgment. I'm not comfortable climbing a cliff, so I avoid those kinds of caches.

 

The owner should rate his cache accordingly and spell out any potential dangers in the text, but there are a lot of people out there who enjoy the challenge of caches in a dangerous areas and have the skills to tackle them.

[+hukilaulau]

I tried finding an answer to these but failed:

 

1- if I find a vandalized cache, do I simply report to the owner through "needs maintenance" log ?

 

2- I found a cache that, in my opinion, is in a dangerous location, I reported this in my log entry, now the owner does not agree with my observation, and seems "annoyed". I still think the cache is dangerously located. Now what ? Should (can) I take more action ?

I agree with others. And here's another angle: You're saying OTHER people shouldn't try it, but it was okay for YOU to find it and claim a smiley? Kind of hypocritical. If you believe the cache should not be hunted, do the right thing and delete your find...

[+tozainamboku]

It does make me question why the cache owner has used the

Stroller accessible, Wheelchair accessible, and Kid friendly attributes

And lists as hazards

Ticks, Snakes, and Thorns

But doesn't list

Cliffs or falling rock, or Dangerous area.

 

Either the OP is exaggerating the danger or the cache owner is using the wrong attributes.

[+JohnnyVegas]

 

Wanna see an example? Compare my log with Outdoors Lady's log for this cache Ledge of Doom

 

Now that's a 5 star I have edited the log I made. Less shouting, and simply stating an opinion.

 

Thanks all.

One person posted a negative log with their DNF. It does not mean anything, they may have appoached the cache from the wrong direction. Other people enjoyed the cache. If the safety of your fellow cachers is a concern you should just hide caches that are rated a 1 for terrain. I have only done a few caches that were risky, one of those was because I approached acache from the wrong direction and allmost get swept into the shark infested water off of the coast of San Francisco by a wave that I did not see. That was not the falt of the cache or the cache owner.

Edited March 21, 2008 by JohnnyVegas

[+Renegade Knight]

In my opinion (note: Dutch = flatland) this location is too close to (actually on) the side of a mountain. If a searcher slips, he/she will drop straight (!) down for 20 meters (thats 50 feet...) I will get pictures from the cam in a day or so. We have just come home from vacation.

 

The cache is fine. If you are not comfortable seeking it. don't. The simple fact is that people vary in skill and comfort level. We finders make this decision at every cache we seek. No reason to report a cache unless the cache is universally dangerous. Ie full of antrax or so radioactive that you can't go near it without frying yourself.

[+TrailGators]

I tried finding an answer to these but failed:

 

1- if I find a vandalized cache, do I simply report to the owner through "needs maintenance" log ?

 

2- I found a cache that, in my opinion, is in a dangerous location, I reported this in my log entry, now the owner does not agree with my observation, and seems "annoyed". I still think the cache is dangerously located. Now what ? Should (can) I take more action ?

1 - yes

2- I would just say something in your log to say that you think it is dangerous. This will warn those that are like you. Others may not think it's dangerous at all.

Edited March 21, 2008 by TrailGators

[Motorcycle_Mama]

Now after seeing the pictures my opinion is even stronger.

 

The cache location looks perfectly fine.

[+novw.nl]

I agree with others. And here's another angle: You're saying OTHER people shouldn't try it, but it was okay for YOU to find it and claim a smiley? Kind of hypocritical. If you believe the cache should not be hunted, do the right thing and delete your find...

 

Where did you read other people should not try this cache ? I merely added a log in which I tell people I think this is a dangerous location.

[+Team Dromomania]

In the pictures all looks ok. I've found several where you had to climb hand over hand over or up a cliff to nab. I've also passed on the ones I thought my limited skills wouldn't do the job. DANGER is different for each person. The ones I've passed on may be easy for the next cacher. They may be easy for me if I bring special climbing equipment.

 

Another point, I once attempted a cache on the edge of a cliff with a drop of several hundred feet. I tried a straight line approach and things got real hairy when I went over the side on the small shelf with no safety gear. I carefully made my way back up and after taking a closer look I found the proper approach which an 8 year old could have done.

 

Know your limits. Scout things out. Be safe. Have fun.

Edited March 22, 2008 by Team Dromomania

[+WRASTRO]

Based on the pictures and the cache descriptions for both caches, they seem reasonably rated and described. I would agree with the response from the cache owner. Plus, I wish I could have a chance to be there and find them.

[cliff_hanger]

 

Wanna see an example? Compare my log with Outdoors Lady's log for this cache Ledge of Doom

 

Now that's a 5 star I have edited the log I made. Less shouting, and simply stating an opinion.

 

Thanks all.

 

Good choice.

 

And here's something really ironic (though certainly no fault of Outdoors Lady):

 

Outdoors Lady did not think Ledge of Doom was a safe cache and chose not to do it her log

I safely found and very much enjoyed Ledge of Doom My log

Two weeks later, I ripped my knee open on one of Outdoors Lady's caches - LOL my log

 

Didn't make the connection until later. I was being very careful on LoD because of the perceived danger. I let my concentration slip on Keep On Hiking because it was "easy".

Edited March 22, 2008 by cliff_hanger

[+gof1]

I checked out the page for Doom. Looks like a great place and it will go on my list of places to visit. That said, I don't know that I will log the cache. High places don't make me happy. No reason others shouldn't enjoy the cache though.

[+hukilaulau]

I agree with others. And here's another angle: You're saying OTHER people shouldn't try it, but it was okay for YOU to find it and claim a smiley? Kind of hypocritical. If you believe the cache should not be hunted, do the right thing and delete your find...

 

Where did you read other people should not try this cache ? I merely added a log in which I tell people I think this is a dangerous location.

Sorry. my mistake. Here's my answer to question 2:

No.

You're welcome

[+BlueDeuce]

I agree with others. And here's another angle: You're saying OTHER people shouldn't try it, but it was okay for YOU to find it and claim a smiley? Kind of hypocritical. If you believe the cache should not be hunted, do the right thing and delete your find...

Where did you read other people should not try this cache ? I merely added a log in which I tell people I think this is a dangerous location.

 

The - Danger, Danger, Danger - part.

Edited March 23, 2008 by BlueDeuce

[+tenacityj]

Everybody has a different definition of dangerous. Also, each cache can be dangerous in its own way. I found a cache that was in a tree with some the branches hanging over a 20 foot drop from the lowest branch to rocks and a river below. The cache was hidden on a low branch NOT hanging over the river. I couldn't find the darn cache and seeing that the terrain rating was above a 2 - I figured that the cache was higher in the tree. I ended up climbing to the very top of the tree. Very dangerous idea. You can read about it here[url/]

[Motorcycle_Mama]

The OP also came here asking where he could report a cache in a dangerous location (in his opinion) and how to "take more action" (in his words) since he had already posted a log. He didn't start off saying that he merely wanted to tell people that this is a dangerous location in his opinion. Now, he's singing a different tune, which is fine, but he's also trying to make it seem like that was his original intention, which clearly it was not.

Edited March 23, 2008 by Motorcycle_Mama

[+novw.nl]

The OP also came here asking where he could report a cache in a dangerous location (in his opinion) and how to "take more action" (in his words) since he had already posted a log. He didn't start off saying that he merely wanted to tell people that this is a dangerous location in his opinion. Now, he's singing a different tune, which is fine, but he's also trying to make it seem like that was his original intention, which clearly it was not.

 

You continuesly keep reading things that are untrue and things I did not write. Is it my English, or your interpretation ?

 

"reported this in my log entry, <snip> I still think <snip> Now what ? Should (can) I take more action ?

 

I reported IN MY LOG ENTRY (I think it is dangerous) & SHOULD I take more action ?

 

So I was asking if it is advisable to take more action, or that I should just leave it as is. With a note in my found log.

 

My questions were answered. Thank you.

[+BlueDeuce]

Ask for a Mod to close the thread and it shall be done.

[+briansnat]

It was asked and I have made it so.