Rant: Helping the Muggles to our cache!

[+DaFunkyFrogs]

"I must say the area is suberb...I'll bring my trunks and a tube next time...muggles were having a great time in the water below."

That is what was last logged on the cache, just a few days ago.

We went there today to drop off a coin and ya know what we found? Georubble on the canal bank and no cache!

Gee, I wonder what happened to it? What moron shows the muggles where your cache is and then tells you about it on your cache page? AAARRRGGGHHHH!!!!!!

[+Vinny & Sue Team]

"I must say the area is suberb...I'll bring my trunks and a tube next time...muggles were having a great time in the water below."

That is what was last logged on the cache, just a few days ago.

We went there today to drop off a coin and ya know what we found? Georubble on the canal bank and no cache!

Gee, I wonder what happened to it? What moron shows the muggles where your cache is and then tells you about it on your cache page? AAARRRGGGHHHH!!!!!!

A few points:

• Where in the log entry which you have quoted did the finder state in any way shape, or form that she/he had shown muggles where the cache was located? I think your imagination is a tad overactive today!
   
  
• A very large percentage of cache finds, and perhaps a vast majority of them, are made with muggles not far away, and thus I would personally see no cause for alarm in the statements made by the finder.
   
  
• Any time you place a cache fairly near a trail or a much-frequented beach, shorline or canal path, there is indeed the very real chance that muggles who wander off the trail or path during their play may find the cache and may accidentally or unknowingly destroy it; this is all part of the hazards of the sport when emplacing such hides. Furthermore, cache containers are muggled every day by dogs and wild animals. This too is all part of the normal hazards of the sport when emplacing such hides.
   
  
• And, if your cache was a cache located VERY near a trail or canal path, and in a very visible location, one where you feel that great stealth is required on the part of finders, please realize that many cachers, including many very active and well-known forum members, simply do not believe in employing significant amounts of stealth, and instead, if searching for a cache in a high-muggle area, will simply go about their business in a brisk, businesslike and efficient way, but without employing stealth or sneakiness.
  

If you really, really, really do not like ANY of the above facts, then perhaps you should not be placing caches in such settings, as you are bound to be frustrated again and again, for these points which I have iterated above are simply basic and immutable facts of life.

 

 

.

[+DaFunkyFrogs]

Vinny...Vinny....Vinny.........I see you made some assumptions also, I think your imagination is a tad overactive today! like usual.

No where in my post did I state that this is a well-frequented area. As a matter of fact there are ALMOST never anyone around for miles! It is illegal to swim in these canals. You would never expect to need stealth mode there. But in the same situation I would have passed on by and come back another day. Granted, the cacher was from out of the area and may not be able to come back, but that's okay too.

[+Harry Dolphin]

I'll agree with Vinny here. Nowhere does the cache lag say anything about muggles seeing the cache beng found. Only that muggles were having fun in the water below. Good gracious! Several hundred people passed within feet of me today, whilst I was recovering a cache waypoint in Central Park. Muggles are a part of life. I doubt that the muggles having fun in the water below even saw what was happening. (Did I mention the time I had to climb over a sleeping muggle, while two other cachers pointed east exclaiming "Look at that!" to distract everyone else's attention?)

If you don't want muggles seeing what geocachers are doing, don't hide a cache where there are muggles!

[+TotemLake]

Actually, Vinney made some very valid points based on information provided. If you want accurate replies, please be kind enough to include all the details.

 

I found 2 caches today, well actually 4, but two of them are relevant to your situation.

 

The first cache I found was already located by two kids who saw evidence of something not quite right and pulled it out. They were nice to read what it was about and signed the log and were even getting ready to put it back in it's hide when I happened upon them. This cache was not in a real visible spot and was about 300 feet from the main trail on an overgrown spur that you had to be willing to push through.

 

I found the second cache by way of a social trail that led to an oddly straight stacked pile of sticks under a log not more than 10 feet from the main trail. I can't stress this enough... The location was highly visible from that trail even though the box itself was well hidden. While I had it out (and moved to a spot about 30 feet away, I was looked at rather strangely by users of the trail. I'm surprised it lasted as long as it has.

 

This isn't the first time I've located caches that were muggled in allegedly hard to spot locations. If one person can think of that location, why can't others do the same?

 

Have you tried sending an e-mail to the finder to see if they felt they were unobserved? Or are you just making assumptions based on the last log?

[Mag Magician]

My Goodness! You have 71 cache hides in less than a square mile, and you have never seen one muggled or trashed? OK, maybe a little more than a square mile, but the point is the same. It happens, for no reason, and with no explanation. We learn to live with the disappointments of being cache hiders.

[+DaFunkyFrogs]

A PERSON took this cache, not an animal or aliens, the container and swag were gone, but some things were thrown on the ground, you know the worthless stuff, stash note, empty baggy that the log was in etc.

If people were in the water below having fun, they were within 10-15 feet of the cacher. Close enough to see what he was doing, maybe even what color his eyes are. The muggles were engaged in an illegal activity to start with, I sure wouldn't trust them not to steal the cache. And like I said, this is a very UNfrequented area, they were probably very interested in someone else being there and what was going on.

[Motorcycle_Mama]

So because they were swimming (which is an unauthorized activity) that automatically makes them thieves and/or vandals? Seems like a huge stretch.

[+DaFunkyFrogs]

Yes, I did send the cacher an email asking if he had been observed. I have not gotten a reply.

Yes, we have 71 caches. They cover an area MUCH larger than a square mile, what does that have to do with the topic? I have so many so close together that I shouldn't miss THIS one? hmmm

I do miss this one, it was an important link in a series we have that stretches for miles, leading people out to a wildlife refuge that has a lot of things to do, nature center, hiking, bird watching, wildlife photography and more.

Should I not care if someone is careless with my cache? Well if that is the case, then I shouldn't worry as much as I do about being careful with yours either (no one in particular, you guys are probably way out of my area anyways).

Swimming there isn't an 'unauthorized activity', it is illegal and posted all over the place. They would be arrested for it. People drown in these canals.

[+TotemLake]

Then the correct action is to to wait for their answer... then rant.

Edited July 14, 2008 by TotemLake

[+DaFunkyFrogs]

Then the correct action is to to wait for their answer... then rant.

 

But....but......I wanted to have a hissy fit NOW!

If I wait, I won't want to stamp my feet and hold my breath anymore.

[+TotemLake]

Then the correct action is to to wait for their answer... then rant.

 

But....but......I wanted to have a hissy fit NOW!

If I wait, I won't want to stamp my feet and hold my breath anymore.

[+briansnat]

I've seen logs where searchers met non geocachers either showed them the cache, or had them join in the hunt and everything turned out fine. Happened on a cache of mine last weekend in fact.

 

Sometimes it's bad idea, sometimes it's not. You may be recruiting a new geocacher, or you could be sentencing the cache to ruin or theft. I don't see anything inherently wrong with letting people see you in certain instances, but you need to be careful who.

 

A family who earnestly seems interested is likely OK. An irate neighbor or a group of teens, could be a bad idea.

[+Snoogans]

My Goodness! You have 71 cache hides in less than a square mile, and you have never seen one muggled or trashed? OK, maybe a little more than a square mile, but the point is the same.

 

Sorry to drag the topic on a tangent, but what is the new fascination I'm seeing with downing folks for having a buncha hides in a relatively small area have to do with ANYTHING negative to geocaching? (Yes, that was your tone and I'm seeing it more and more lately.)

 

I tend to hide caches on the way to and from my other caches. IT SAVES GAS and more importantly time to maintain them.

[+DaFunkyFrogs]

His tone didn't bother me---I have 71 hides, yep, I do. They are scattered over a 50 mile radius. So, no, they are not all crowded together every .1 mile. Although that really would cut down on gas costs in my Suburban when I do maintenance.

That was just an untrue and irrelevant point he was trying to make.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

My Goodness! You have 71 cache hides in less than a square mile, and you have never seen one muggled or trashed? OK, maybe a little more than a square mile, but the point is the same.

 

Sorry to drag the topic on a tangent, but what is the new fascination I'm seeing with downing folks for having a buncha hides in a relatively small area have to do with ANYTHING negative to geocaching? (Yes, that was your tone and I'm seeing it more and more lately.)

 

I tend to hide caches on the way to and from my other caches. IT SAVES GAS and more importantly time to maintain them.

 

A few weeks ago I went in search of a cache that involved a 2-3 mile drive up a seasonal road then a .3 mile hike up a trail to find a film container in the woods with heavy tree cover. After finding it, I spotted a spot that was crying for a cache placement so I placed one there. The FTF on that cache was inspired to place another cache in the area. She called it "Chain Reaction".

 

I also place a cache recently in an area near a really good 5 stage series of caches. I thought that the area was worth visiting and wanted to encourage others to go look for the 5 stage series as much as finding my own cache there. The second person to log it said that they spent 2 hours in the area just exploring and watching the activity that goes on there (a ropes course).

[+StarBrand]

I've lost caches within days of placing them. I have loast a cache that was out well over 5 years. It happens. People stumble across them and off they go. Happens to all of us. No sense in making a bunch of rash assumptions about the who what and where.

[Clan Riffster]

Based upon your OP, and your further explanations, I would tend to agree with your assumptions. While there will likely never be stone cold proof, it seems quite possible that the folks 15' away from the cache saw the seeker. Our hunts can oft be seen as a curious activity, drawing attention to an area after we leave, which could certainly be what happened in this case. I can feel your pain, but with 71 hides, I'm sure you recognize this as just being part of the game. If this is, in fact, what happened, it seems to me that the seeker was pretty careless, going through their finding process with folks who already demonstrated they don't care about breaking the law just a few feet away. Personally, I won't knowingly compromise a hide just to gain another smiley. There's always another day.

[+DaFunkyFrogs]

Based upon your OP, and your further explanations, I would tend to agree with your assumptions. While there will likely never be stone cold proof, it seems quite possible that the folks 15' away from the cache saw the seeker. Our hunts can oft be seen as a curious activity, drawing attention to an area after we leave, which could certainly be what happened in this case. I can feel your pain, but with 71 hides, I'm sure you recognize this as just being part of the game. If this is, in fact, what happened, it seems to me that the seeker was pretty careless, going through their finding process with folks who already demonstrated they don't care about breaking the law just a few feet away. Personally, I won't knowingly compromise a hide just to gain another smiley. There's always another day.

 

Exactly!

 

I am always careful not to attract undue attention to a cache I am searching for, no matter where it is. Sometimes that means just casually going about my business and finding the cache. Sometimes that means coming back another time. For some strange reason I just assumed that was how everyone did it. I should know better.

[Mag Magician]

My Goodness! You have 71 cache hides in less than a square mile, and you have never seen one muggled or trashed? OK, maybe a little more than a square mile, but the point is the same.

 

Sorry to drag the topic on a tangent, but what is the new fascination I'm seeing with downing folks for having a buncha hides in a relatively small area have to do with ANYTHING negative to geocaching? (Yes, that was your tone and I'm seeing it more and more lately.)

 

I tend to hide caches on the way to and from my other caches. IT SAVES GAS and more importantly time to maintain them.

 

A few weeks ago I went in search of a cache that involved a 2-3 mile drive up a seasonal road then a .3 mile hike up a trail to find a film container in the woods with heavy tree cover. After finding it, I spotted a spot that was crying for a cache placement so I placed one there. The FTF on that cache was inspired to place another cache in the area. She called it "Chain Reaction".

 

I also place a cache recently in an area near a really good 5 stage series of caches. I thought that the area was worth visiting and wanted to encourage others to go look for the 5 stage series as much as finding my own cache there. The second person to log it said that they spent 2 hours in the area just exploring and watching the activity that goes on there (a ropes course).

 

I get the point! Everyone is quoting a portion of my reply, not including the full context, so I apologise. I should not have included the joking part about 1 square mile. The context would have read, 71 hides, and you have never experienced a muggled, or trashed cache?

[+Confucius' Cat]

Should I not care if someone is careless with my cache?

I would certainly expect you to CARE, but you have jumped to a conclusion that does not seem to be well supported by the facts presented.

 

Many times cachers snag finds right under the proverbial noses of muggles without giving away the cache and to assume that the cacher in question did NOT take traditional "stealth" precautions is a fact not indicated in the log.

 

As quoted, the log seems to indicate that the cache was above the muggles' sight-line and therefore unlikely to have been noticed. The log does not indicate that the muggles saw the cacher at all, nor precisely that they were even present when the cache was retrieved.

 

I have personally stood 30 feet from a trail, cache in hand, dressed in hunter orange, as a dozen people passed by on the trail and NONE of them seemed to notice me. In fact, I don't recall seeing any of them even LOOK at me.

 

The muggles in question could have been so involved in their water fun (or trying not to drown or get arrested) that BIGFOOT could have been snorting and snarling and throwing the cache against the rocks and they would not have even noticed.

 

The log says there were muggles and it looked like fun. No more.

 

Did the cacher wait till they were gone before snagging the cache? Did the muggles look up at the cacher? The log does not say.

 

Did the cited muggles take the cache? No evidence to support that either.

 

Did someone else come along and accidentally find it? Possible.

 

Muggling is a part of the game and happens with or without cachers "helping" the muggles.

 

If i was the cacher in question I would be VERY offended by the wording of the title of the thread.

 

Giving fellow cachers benefit of a doubt is a really good policy.

[+wapahani]

Prime example of this thing.

This evening we placed another cache and had to run into town. We decided to stop by a couple of caches that are located in "possible high muggle territory".

We arrived the first location and several people are out gardening in the local gardens. We moved on.

We arrived the second location and found evidence of the cache, or parts of it. So, knowing from other info that the cache owner owns a location around the corner.

We saw him and let him know. He said it was part of it, but not all. He told us to just log it, it was cool with him. I told him we could grab it later.

I told the wife not to worry about it and when she questioned why, I said "pulling a cache in front of muggles will kill a good cache location" and "that is wasn't worth it right now!"

 

Stealth should mean more then just stealth, it should mean COMMON SENSE in not pulling a cache when others are in sight of you.