Cache placed in a "USED" septic tank

[+Moose Mob]

The question wasn't in reference if we wanted a cache like that, it is pertaining to the issue of suspending a person for placing such a cache, and the Anthrax example, and few other pieces of the discussion as well.

 

Although they do each have their roles here... legality, safety and quality are three independent issues that need to be addressed independently.

[+Renegade Knight]

As far as safety, setting up a situation where the cacher has the choice of exposing themseles to potential harm is a different story. A cacher does not have to climb the hill where he could break his ankle. A cacher does not have to cross the street where he might get run over. A cacher does not have to enter the pickle park at 2:00am.

 

Not all of these are good ideas. Poor judgement, on it's own accord, does not merit banishment.

 

I agree with those examples. However, placing a cache in a vat of human excrement seems like it crosses the line. Why would the site want to list a cache like that?

 

It's worth asking when the site became active. An old outhouse is often a treasure trove. The fecal matter having long since turned to compost and the things tossed in to get rid of them now accessable to archeologists and treasure hunters.

 

Likewise with the cache. If the cache was placed when it was unused and not it's active that's not really the owners fault.

[+TrailGators]

It's worth asking when the site became active. An old outhouse is often a treasure trove. The fecal matter having long since turned to compost and the things tossed in to get rid of them now accessable to archeologists and treasure hunters.

 

Likewise with the cache. If the cache was placed when it was unused and not it's active that's not really the owners fault.

RK, the cache was placed 7 weeks ago. Here is the OPs description again:

Recently I ran across a quite unusual cache placed near an condemned home. This is obviously used by the homeless. Graffiti and garbage everywhere. Just outside of the former dwelling is (for lack of a better term) an outhouse. Construction is a concrete septic tank with a 30 gal drum built in. Even has a toilet seat! Well the cache is attached to a stick, and lowered into the tank. Tank is full of...Well I can only assume what is still in the tank but there is an odor.

I know we should try to give people the benefit of the doubt, but does that sound like a "treasure trove" to you?

[+Harry Dolphin]

Having spent some time investigating old outhouses with a metal detector, I'd have to say that that one does not seem a likely prospect. I think I used one like that on the AT once. Far too moderrn to be a treasure trove. Though you'll be surprised what falls out of pockets when one is on the run to the facilities.

[+gerkmax]

there's no use complaining about something you willingly went to find.

 

I'm sure someone can come up with a legally-placed cache that could still knowingly place you in harm. But would that be okay? Is there a test of competency in the process to become a geocacher?

 

Suppose you have a cacher who sees a a cache in the middle of a pit of snakes, assumes they're non-poisonous, reaches in, gets bit and dies. That cacher knowingly put his hand in there.

 

Or, let's say it's out on a frozen lake with a big sign that says "DANGER THIN ICE", but the cacher assumes that they can make it, because you'd have be able to get to that cache. She knowingly went out on that ice.

 

Just because there isn't a rule against something doesn't mean it's okay because the person knowingly accepted the risks.

 

Again, common sense should say "Hey, somebody might get hurt, maybe this isn't a good idea."

 

I'm all for inventive caches. Caches that SEEM dangerous, but aren't. A cache hanging VERY far over a waterfall might seem like a dangerous thing, but if the description said "there's a safe solution, think about it first", and there's a string somewhere to pull the cache closer... that would be a great thing.

 

Like I said before, if you didn't have to open the "septic tank" cache, just look at it, I would have no problem. And most people would say "You know what, it's not worth it." But someone is going to think "It must be a fake septic tank. No one would do that to a fellow cacher."

 

(still shocked that there's a cache in a septic tank somewhere in this world.

[+flask]

 

Or, let's say it's out on a frozen lake with a big sign that says "DANGER THIN ICE", but the cacher assumes that they can make it, because you'd have be able to get to that cache. She knowingly went out on that ice.

 

 

we have in fact driven a car out onto ice the thickness of which we were uncertain. the cache owner posted it as such. we assumed the risk.

 

if you stick your hand into a hole containing animals, you have assumed the risk.

 

if the cache owner has warned you of the danger (and this cache owner has) it's YOUR PROBLEM if you choose to go find it.

 

if a person is stupid enough to think that just because a cache was hidden that it's safe enough to find, i see it as just another example of darwin at work.

 

you! outta the gene pool!

[AZcachemeister]

With all the details that have been revealed, and the ongoing discussion about safety:

 

I don't think this is the kind of cache that should regularly be promoted.

On the other hand, it IS a break from the usual, which is what I believe the owner is trying to achieve.

(If you think it's in bad taste, then don't lick it!)

The location might be private property, which is probably an issue.

The cache page tells you what you might be in for, why go there if you don't like the set-up?

I probably wouldn't go too far out of my way for it, but I wouldn't shy away either.

[Dinoprophet]

Every cache is dangerous. Even with lamp post caches, you risk touching a loose wire or getting hit by a car or grabbing a bees' nest. At least with a pit of snakes or a sign that says thin ice, the danger is obvious.

[+gerkmax]

Every cache is dangerous. Even with lamp post caches, you risk touching a loose wire or getting hit by a car or grabbing a bees' nest. At least with a pit of snakes or a sign that says thin ice, the danger is obvious.

 

So you're saying that if the danger is stated, then all fault and liability is on the person seeking the cache? That allows someone who is out to hurt people, to get off scott-free. He'd just have to say "Be careful, you could get hurt", then set a trap.

 

I think there needs to be some trust that the cacher isn't purposely trying to hurt fellow cachers. If there is danger, then proper notification needs to be given. And caches where infectious materials might come in contact with someone, needs to have better warning. Or, not exist at all.

[+Castle Mischief]

Even with lamp post caches, you risk touching a loose wire...

 

Given the way that most lamp posts are constructed, you'd just about have to knock the post over first and break it in half to get to the wires. I've yet to see a confirmed account of anybody getting zapped looking under a lamp post.

 

But I agree with your point.

[Dinoprophet]

Every cache is dangerous. Even with lamp post caches, you risk touching a loose wire or getting hit by a car or grabbing a bees' nest. At least with a pit of snakes or a sign that says thin ice, the danger is obvious.

 

So you're saying that if the danger is stated, then all fault and liability is on the person seeking the cache?

Not just me. This disclaimer is at the top of every cache page, even yours.

 

That allows someone who is out to hurt people, to get off scott-free. He'd just have to say "Be careful, you could get hurt", then set a trap.

No, it doesn't. Intentionally inflicting harm on someone is still illegal.

 

I think there needs to be some trust that the cacher isn't purposely trying to hurt fellow cachers. If there is danger, then proper notification needs to be given. And caches where infectious materials might come in contact with someone, needs to have better warning. Or, not exist at all.

Again, that's true for any cache. You have no idea whether some random hiker recently used the log that a cache is under for a pit stop.

[+flask]

 

 

So you're saying that if the danger is stated, then all fault and liability is on the person seeking the cache?

 

 

yes, that's what i'm saying.

 

That allows someone who is out to hurt people, to get off scott-free. He'd just have to say "Be careful, you could get hurt", then set a trap.

 

no, that's just silly. "be careful, you could get hurt" is not clearly stating the danger.

 

"there are needles and human waste present" is stating the danger.

"the ice is unreliable and may be too thin to support your weight" is stating the danger.

 

on top of which, i don't think anyone is making a case for caches set with intent to harm. present danger is not the same as intent to harm.

 

all caches need not be safe. some people enjoy dangerous caches. all caches should be correctly labeled, and an informed person should reasonably be able to manage the risk through proper precautions and personal fitness.

 

if you seek a cache for which there are hazards about which you have been informed, it's YOUR PROBLEM. if you do not enjoy problem-solving with regard to hazards, don't look for that cache.

 

it's really that simple.

[+ZSandmann]

I'd log that cache. It's open air, wear a pair of gloves and sanitize afterwards. Don't see the big deal.

If the log book were damp, would you still sign it?

 

Yep, I've signed plenty of foul smelling logs in the past. But I might throw the pen away

[+sbell111]

Every cache is dangerous. Even with lamp post caches, you risk touching a loose wire or getting hit by a car or grabbing a bees' nest. At least with a pit of snakes or a sign that says thin ice, the danger is obvious.

So you're saying that if the danger is stated, then all fault and liability is on the person seeking the cache? That allows someone who is out to hurt people, to get off scott-free. He'd just have to say "Be careful, you could get hurt", then set a trap.

 

I think there needs to be some trust that the cacher isn't purposely trying to hurt fellow cachers. If there is danger, then proper notification needs to be given. And caches where infectious materials might come in contact with someone, needs to have better warning. Or, not exist at all.

Moose Mob covered this part of the issue in post #95.

[+KD5XB]

I just find it interesting that this thread, with the cache description, is in between other threads about "going paperless"!

Edited July 21, 2008 by KD5XB

[+BigDaddyGRC]

Yes, walk away is right!

 

The person whom placed this cache is a strange character. Most of his hides have some sort of twist or humor involved.... To be honest I thought this was a play on words. Not this time...LOL

 

Funning aside, this hide (to me) is disappointing. I just don't see the "fun" in this.

 

Cache: GC1CQ1H

[Keystone]

The topic starter has chosen to continue the discussion in a separate thread, so I am closing this one.