Discreet question

[+Proud Soccer Mom]

Totally hypothetical, of course. Or maybe I'm asking for my brother's best friend's girlfriend's roommate.

 

Here's the meat of it:

 

Let's say you're geocaching in a place where there are no geocaching restrictions and all is happy but you know, courtesy of information from the individual in charge of this sort of thing, that geocaching is strongly disliked and if it were known to be in a particular area of jurisdiction, it would be banned.

 

Let's say you have a hide... it's one hide amidst many hides by many other cachers... in this jurisdiction (which has no restrictions at this time). Let's say someone cannot find the hide and decides to start flapping their gums to every official on the planet that this cache exists. Let's say the office is now interested ... and not in a good way.

 

Do you:

(1) Hold your breath and hope your hide isn't discovered and doesn't trigger a city-wide ban;

(2) Remove your hide and archive the cache to prevent it being discovered and a city-wide ban;

(3) Remove and archive the hide because now that the cat's out of the bag, there'll likely be a ban, anyway;

(4) Send a note to all the other CO's in the area to let them know what might be happening.

 

How do you respond to the cacher who wanted the smiley so bad they started seeing if particular people (who aren't geocachers) knew where the cache was and started this mess (before even asking you for an additional hint)?

 

EDIT TO ADD:

LEO's are completely cool in this area. If you're interrupted by a LEO and say you're geocaching, they know what that means and move along. It's just this one individual in this one office who has the absolute right and authority to make the decision to ban.

Edited January 8, 2009 by Redneck Parrotheads

[+J-Way]

Let's say you're geocaching in a place where there are no geocaching restrictions and all is happy but you know, courtesy of information from the individual in charge of this sort of thing, that geocaching is strongly disliked and if it were known to be in a particular area of jurisdiction, it would be banned.

 

... It's just this one individual in this one office who has the absolute right and authority to make the decision to ban.

Sounds like a lack of "adequate permission".

 

Hypothetically, a cacher (we'll call this cacher by a random name... say... "RP") places a cache on land controlled by a person known to be hostile to geocaching. RP know the manager is hostile to caching. We'll even assume the cache was placed before RP found out about the hostility and that RP didn't intentionally try to sneak a cache into a place where the manager was hostile. But the hostility is now a known fact, and even worse, the hostile manager now knows that the cache exists.

 

Personally, if I were RP, I would choose (2) and archive. If I found out that a land manager was hostile to geocaching I would remove any caches of mine that were on land that person controlled because obviously I don't have permission to place a cache there. If I knew that manager personally I would try to convince him/her that geocaching can be harmless, and if I succeeded I would then replace the cache.

[+Proud Soccer Mom]

Let's say you're geocaching in a place where there are no geocaching restrictions and all is happy but you know, courtesy of information from the individual in charge of this sort of thing, that geocaching is strongly disliked and if it were known to be in a particular area of jurisdiction, it would be banned.

 

... It's just this one individual in this one office who has the absolute right and authority to make the decision to ban.

Sounds like a lack of "adequate permission".

 

Hypothetically, a cacher (we'll call this cacher by a random name... say... "RP") places a cache on land controlled by a person known to be hostile to geocaching. RP know the manager is hostile to caching. We'll even assume the cache was placed before RP found out about the hostility and that RP didn't intentionally try to sneak a cache into a place where the manager was hostile. But the hostility is now a known fact, and even worse, the hostile manager now knows that the cache exists.

 

Personally, if I were RP, I would choose (2) and archive. If I found out that a land manager was hostile to geocaching I would remove any caches of mine that were on land that person controlled because obviously I don't have permission to place a cache there. If I knew that manager personally I would try to convince him/her that geocaching can be harmless, and if I succeeded I would then replace the cache.

 

And what would you do regarding the dozens of caches hid by other caches that are also covered in this presumed jurisdiction? This is also a jurisdiction where the law is what matters (not personal feelings) so no cachers (not just this RP person) were in the wrong in their hide placements (nor reviewers for approving all the hides), but personal feelings can become law (etc etc etc) which would force the archive of all the caches.

 

Would you let the other CO's know the cat was out of the bag?

[GOF and Bacall]

What would Jimmy Buffett Do?

[sdarken]

It doesn't seem practical to do something about dozens of other caches. Perhaps you might want to consider temporarily disabling and removing your cache until the dust settles. Alternatively, if you're not terribly attached to your cache, archive and remove it altogether.

Edited January 8, 2009 by sdarken

[+Proud Soccer Mom]

What would Jimmy Buffett Do?

 

Drinking and singing a song does make things much better.

[+DiamondDaveG]

It sounds to me that 'adequate permission' was given for the actual placement but now a disgruntled cacher has found the one person in the jurisdiction that likes to throw their weight around.

 

Personally, I would disable and remove with a short note about why. I would also send a note to the local reviewer giving them the full details and let them know it may be a while before reactivated. If it drags on entirely too long, I would just archive it and look for another location to place it.

 

As far as notifying everyone else, I probably would. Around here we all seem to look out for each other and I know I would appreciate a note about the situation.

 

 

-edited for clarification-

Edited January 9, 2009 by DiamondDaveG

[+oldnavy59]

What would Jimmy Buffett Do?

 

Its 5oclock somewhere

[+va griz]

It's kind of difficult to tell if this hyothetical person, "the individual in charge of this sort of thing" (IICTST from here on out) is just somebody uninformed or if the IICTST is a jerk. If they are uninformed I might try to talk to them politely before the gum flapping cacher goes to stir the pot. If IICTST is a jerk you might just be stuck. Of the choices given I think I would wait until IICTST gave their final stamp of dissaproval since I didn't do anything wrong or illegal.

 

Please let us know how it hypothetically comes out, Griz

[+wavector]

Let's say the office is now interested ... and not in a good way.

...

It's just this one individual in this one office who has the absolute right and authority to make the decision to ban.

 

It sounds like it is a case of "what is happening here" happening.

 

If this one individual in control dislikes geocaching and they have the right (or duty) to legislate recreational activity of this type and they reacted negatively to finding out that geocaches already exist within their area of responsibility then I think it is too late to do anything about that.

 

You could start a discussion in the local geocaching forums right away to see what other local geocachers may know, this would serve the secondary purpose of alerting new hiders to the potential problem.

A geocacher could and might talk directly to other cache owners but that would depend upon the local geocaching community.

 

Archiving your own cache in an attempt to hide it from the person in authority is not going to change anything, it isn't too hard to find this listing service and locate all the caches that may be an issue.

 

When the National Parks decided to change the rules and restrict geocaching to a permit system they actually went out and took the caches they wanted removed. People could go and get them back but they were just picked up and removed by the park authority.

 

Geocaching has developed as an activity that is "under the radar" in many locales. That is starting to change as the park systems become aware of many new visitors out "geocaching" and CITO events and Earthcaches spread the message that permission is required and preferred. It just takes one forward, vocal geocacher to lay the groundwork for a good relationship with a person in authority.

 

If one individual has the "absolute authority" to make the decision and they "dislike geocaching" and no one steps up to try and create a good working relationship then your description of the situation suggests a ban is likely going to be the result.

 

I would archive my hide and approach the person in authority and I would do that as soon as I realized there was an issue. I didn't see that on the list of choices though.

Edited January 9, 2009 by wavector

[+fox-and-the-hound]

Let's say you're geocaching in a place where there are no geocaching restrictions and all is happy but you know, courtesy of information from the individual in charge of this sort of thing, that geocaching is strongly disliked and if it were known to be in a particular area of jurisdiction, it would be banned.

 

Let's say you have a hide... it's one hide amidst many hides by many other cachers... in this jurisdiction (which has no restrictions at this time). Let's say someone cannot find the hide and decides to start flapping their gums to every official on the planet that this cache exists. Let's say the office is now interested ... and not in a good way.

 

Assuming the CO got permission from someone to begin with, no worries. Assuming they didn't... they should go get it. If you can't get it from one office, get it from another. Print out some of the downloadable brochures and show that it's a family-friendly activity and take away the misconception or possibility of a perceived threat. We were surprised when a police chief suddenly turned 180 and took our side in defending a cache placement in the past. From that point on, no problems. Besides, there's always somewhere else to hide a cache. More smilies, more fun, new places and happy faces.

[+Vinny & Sue Team]

Totally hypothetical, of course. Or maybe I'm asking for my brother's best friend's girlfriend's roommate.

 

Here's the meat of it:

 

Let's say you're geocaching in a place where there are no geocaching restrictions and all is happy but you know, courtesy of information from the individual in charge of this sort of thing, that geocaching is strongly disliked and if it were known to be in a particular area of jurisdiction, it would be banned.

 

Let's say you have a hide... it's one hide amidst many hides by many other cachers... in this jurisdiction (which has no restrictions at this time). Let's say someone cannot find the hide and decides to start flapping their gums to every official on the planet that this cache exists. Let's say the office is now interested ... and not in a good way.

 

Do you:

(1) Hold your breath and hope your hide isn't discovered and doesn't trigger a city-wide ban;

(2) Remove your hide and archive the cache to prevent it being discovered and a city-wide ban;

(3) Remove and archive the hide because now that the cat's out of the bag, there'll likely be a ban, anyway;

(4) Send a note to all the other CO's in the area to let them know what might be happening.

 

How do you respond to the cacher who wanted the smiley so bad they started seeing if particular people (who aren't geocachers) knew where the cache was and started this mess (before even asking you for an additional hint)?

 

EDIT TO ADD:

LEO's are completely cool in this area. If you're interrupted by a LEO and say you're geocaching, they know what that means and move along. It's just this one individual in this one office who has the absolute right and authority to make the decision to ban.

I respectfully submit that you may wish to consider an option that you have not listed above, namely, as follows:

 

(5) Assuming that it is legal or at least somewhat permissible under the local laws of your region, territory, or country, the most expeditious, smooth and trouble-free route may simply be to hire an international ultra-assassin to quickly and quietly take out the clueless offender. These people are highly-trained, often have extensive military and paramilitary backgrounds, provide their own equipment and tools, travel anywhere in world to reach jobsites, and will often get the job done within 12 to 24 hours of your first call, assuming that you have an expeditious method of getting funds to them quickly (some even accept Paypal.) Although there are many agencies serving this field, the agency that seems to be most frequently used by geocachers for dealing with problem cachers (i.e., cache pirates, cache thieves, coin thieves, etc.) -- and yes, they do have a website -- is Hired Assassin Agency (aka HAA) . This particular service also offers Eyewitness Elimination Services (EES) as part and parcel of its normal "hit" package.

 

Please do not pursue this route unless it is legal in your region or country, and unless you are fully comfortable with this pathway on a moral and ethical level.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

[+TrailGators]

It sounds to me that 'adequate permission' was given for the actual placement but now a disgruntled cacher has found the one person in the jurisdiction that likes to throw their weight around.

 

Personally, I would disable and remove with a short note about why. I would also send a note to the local reviewer giving them the full details and let them know it may be a while before reactivated. If it drags on entirely too long, I would just archive it and look for another location to place it.

 

As far as notifying everyone else, I probably would. Around here we all seem to look out for each other and I know I would appreciate a note about the situation.

 

 

-edited for clarification-

This is how I read it too. I would archive it to lay low and let things blow over. The wrong action could mess it up for everyone else. I would let everyone else aware of it as well as the local reviewer as DiamondDaveG suggested. Then I would have the geocaching community do some CITOs in the area to build some positive rapport. Edited January 9, 2009 by TrailGators

[+Proud Soccer Mom]

Thanks for the indepth comments and thoughtful advice (which I'll pass on to my brother's best friend's wife's cousin's former roommate, etc etc etc). I know my post was obvious about some things and vague about others, and I apologise for not disclosing all the pertinent details that would have made it easier to give advice and help. It makes me appreciate the advice even more.