Private Property

[+Wadcutter]

The following log is what can happen when one assumes permission has been granted by the landowner. Turned out the person placing the cache had their coords off by 1/4 mile. The listed coords took you to near a farmer's barn about 150 ft from his house.

 

June 20 by Innocent Cacher (11811 found)

Super bad coords!!!

Farmer chased us off with a shot gun,

looked like he was going nuts about people

walking around his yard.

[+Col. Flagg]

oops... forgot to sign off the wife's account

Edited August 24, 2009 by Col. Flagg

[+Colonial Cats]

 

To Clan Riffster involving the pull-off. There is nothing indicating that it is private property now because the sign I did put up was ripped down, torn to pieces and left lying at the bottom of the tree where I put it. I was looking at getting some metal signs made to make it a little more permanent, but I'm sure they'll get bent, broken or all-together removed. I put up about 7 No Trespassing signs at the request of the landowner and 5 of them were tore down within a month, so it's pretty frustrating.

I have been following this thread with great interest. Geocaching will retain it's good name only if we all continue to follow the rules and respect private property. I see that June16 has seen the worst in people (hunter/fisherman confrontations & sign destruction). However, I believe most folks are decent and do respect the rights of others. Maybe some geocachers in that area could organize a CITO event at a near-by public area to help publicize the good geocachers do and to increase local awareness of the sport. Anyway, I believe June16 is seeing that most geocachers want to do the right thing.

[+Unkle Fester]

The following log is what can happen when one assumes permission has been granted by the landowner. Turned out the person placing the cache had their coords off by 1/4 mile. The listed coords took you to near a farmer's barn about 150 ft from his house.

 

June 20 by Innocent Cacher (11811 found)

Super bad coords!!!

Farmer chased us off with a shot gun,

looked like he was going nuts about people

walking around his yard.

In my opinion, these and aparently other cachers were way off base. If I saw it in someones yard - and I have - If I do not have explicite permission, I will not go. If I go home, check the listing and there is no explicite permission, I'll send a note, DNF and maybe a Needs Archived, depending on the circumstances.

 

As a cache finder, we have a responsability to do the right thing. Never should we assume, although it does happen.

 

Although, I too have been chased off with a shotgun, even while being on a public road. But again, not the right time to argue.

 

Double checking coords in Google Earth saves so much headache (and double checking the post before publication occurs)

 

Thanks to June16 for being very level headed about this, with the issues of the No Tresspassing signs being removed, that would frustrate me to no end.

[+Cpl. Klinger]

But you missed my point.

 

No you missed my point. There is a big difference between a sign that denies liability and a law that relieves liability. You can put up all the signs you want, or have people sign all the releases you want. They may help, they may not, but they do not carry the same weight as a law that relieves your liability.

 

That doesn't mean you won't be sued just because of the law, but it does reduce the odds.

 

But either way, what we have to deal with is a land owner who is distrustful of the law which is said to protect them. Again, you missed the overall point of my post. The land owner doesn't want to take the chance on depending upon a law relieving them of liability in a overly litigious society. The land owner wishes no part of what we do on their land, law or no law. So let's just take our toys and go home.

 

If I was the CO in this case, I'd apologize to the land owner (in person, preferably), have some conversation with them about caching, then leave it alone. If I leave the land owner with a good impression of cachers, even when we've been in the wrong, that good can go a long way in the world. Who knows who that land owner might know that they can influence...

[+sbell111]

At the grocery store I manage, we have BIG signs all over the lot stating that we have no liability in case of cart damage. Dump trucks all over state have signs stating that they are not responsible for windshield damage caused by following too closely.

 

There is a big difference between a sign that denies liability, and a law that relieves liability. Those dump trucks will still have to pay if the rock that hits the windshield comes from the load and not from the road. The sign will not make a difference. However, just try to prove the rock came from the road and not the load. (It has been done, but very rare.) The trucking company would have to prove you were too close, also hard to prove.

 

If someone could prove your store was negligent with the carts, your sign won't help. If it was a law it would make a difference.

 

But you missed my point. I talked about a case where it was clear we had no liability. The customer pushed a cart into the corral next to his car, and backed into it because he didn't put it away properly. The coral was empty, seen on video. It was about to go to court, and we settled. People sue ski resorts all the time with signed releases of liability. Under the law, the resort should be absolved of liability because the user signed away their rights and assumed all liabilities, but still suits get filed. And it usually settles out of court. Where was the law then?

The law was right where it should be, sitting behind the judges bench in the courthouse. You elected to avoid that law and settled the case.

 

To Clan Riffster involving the pull-off. There is nothing indicating that it is private property now because the sign I did put up was ripped down, torn to pieces and left lying at the bottom of the tree where I put it. I was looking at getting some metal signs made to make it a little more permanent, but I'm sure they'll get bent, broken or all-together removed. I put up about 7 No Trespassing signs at the request of the landowner and 5 of them were tore down within a month, so it's pretty frustrating.

I suspect that this was done by the hunters and fisherman who are convinced that they are accessing the land appropriately and the sign, therefore, was put up in error.

 

The reason that I believe this is because those individuals would access the area several times and, therefore, be more irked by an inappropriately placed sign (in their opinion) than a cacher would who only accesses the area once. Cachers is likely to either be turned away by the sign, or not, but will likely not have the sign itself irritate them to the point where they feel the need to destroy it.

Edited August 24, 2009 by sbell111

[+zoltig]

Hi June16,

 

Just another thing to consider here that I have not seen mentioned yet - Just because the cache is archived now, that doesn't mean you won't have a geocacher wander in for the next month or so.

 

The reason for this is some cachers preload their GPSr and then it may be weeks before they go out and actually do any caching - not my preferred method but everyone participates in this hobby differently...

 

I felt it prudent to mention this as not all cachers follow the forums.

 

Oh, and welcome to geocaching! Not many of us can claim such an interesting introduction into this hobby.

 

Hmmm.... sound like possible inspiration for a new thread - "What's the story on your conversion from muggle to geocacher"

 

I thank everyone for their cordial conversation. I realize this is sensetive issue for geocachers, seeing one removed and I feel everyone on here has responded in a civilized way. I did think about people trickling in due to the things you stated and that is understandable. My philosophy on approaching trespassers is to be very friendly and cordial right away and proceed based on their reaction. If they say "Sorry about that", I say "Not a problem, thank you". If they get rude, I get rude back. Only one person has gotten rude so far and he was a road hunter and that's a whole different story. He disappeared when I started calling the cops.

 

To Clan Riffster involving the pull-off. There is nothing indicating that it is private property now because the sign I did put up was ripped down, torn to pieces and left lying at the bottom of the tree where I put it. I was looking at getting some metal signs made to make it a little more permanent, but I'm sure they'll get bent, broken or all-together removed. I put up about 7 No Trespassing signs at the request of the landowner and 5 of them were tore down within a month, so it's pretty frustrating.

The one thing that may stop or at least slow down trespassers would be the installation of a 5 wire fence with attached "No Trespassing" signs. It seems to me that the population of people who use the area are probably people who have been there time and time again, who may think that the NT signs are placed by others and not a land owner. In other words they may indeed think it is public land.

We have similar situations here in Colorado (I am sure it is nation wide) where people want to keep others off of public land and place NT signs. A lot of hunters do that especially around river areas. I have several caches that are indeed placed on open land at a river.

In some instances, land owners have gated (unlocked) a forest service road and placed NT signs. The road is indeed an open road to the public but the ruse works on many people.

I am not saying this is your situation but again I think the populace that go there are people who have been doing that for years.

Also not certain about the pull-offs on the road. Depending on the road, it may have some easement to either side and to truly block a pull off may take the county/township approval.

The fence however, placed on private land would help. At that point, I think the police/sheriff could be called for trespassers.

 

<it seems sbell and I were hacking out about the same response at the same time>

Edited August 24, 2009 by zoltig

[+sbell111]

If I was the CO in this case, I'd apologize to the land owner (in person, preferably), have some conversation with them about caching, then leave it alone. If I leave the land owner with a good impression of cachers, even when we've been in the wrong, that good can go a long way in the world. Who knows who that land owner might know that they can influence...

I completely agree that this is what should be done if the cache was placed inappropriately. However, if it turns out that the cache was not on the OP's landlord's land, I would petition for the cache to be unarchived. Edited August 24, 2009 by sbell111

[+ecanderson]

In some instances, land owners have gated (unlocked) a forest service road and placed NT signs. The road is indeed an open road to the public but the ruse works on many people.

... and sometimes in our area of Colorado, this is done either with either the help (or at least the blessing) of local county officials. Do you see that down your way as well?

 

It can sometimes be very hard to tell what territory is fair game and what's not out there.

[+zoltig]

By the way June16, most of us do more when we go find caches. Sometimes we take pictures and share them with others.

Like this one. Sunset From The Cache - Please Share, this week's token non-angst thread

There is more to geocaching than opening the cache. A good cache will take you on an adventure. From what I see in the Google Earth, the cache owner I am sure had good intentions of placing a cache with an adventure in mind plus adding a bit of history. Be careful, you just may learn something!

We do other things as well. We have events where we get together and talk about our adventures and share stories. Here is a local one that we just had. Mountain Fiesta and 4x4 Caching Adventure.

We also get together to clean up areas that are trashed by others. CITO (cache in trash out). A biggie for that is Earth Day in April.

Oh yeah, soo much more!

By the way, the mascot is a frog named Signal. Go figure.

[knowschad]

As far as the liability issue, the landowners are very (OVERYLY) worried about it which is why they don't want anyone on the property. I can't help that as I don't own the property. However, as Cpl. Klinger pointed out, the way people are now-days, I can't blame them. It's better to keep people off the property and perhaps deny a few innocent harmless people a few minutes of fun than to have to go through time and money involving a lawsuit from someone who fell off the railroad bridge and broke their neck.

 

That's what I figured, and what I was referring to is the Recreational Use laws that GOF posted. To quote from the opening paragraph of the document that he linked to:

 

Pennsylvania has a law that limits the legal liability of landowners who make their land available to the public for free recreation. The purpose of the law is to supplement the availability of publicly owned parks and forests by encouraging landowners to allow hikers, fishermen and other recreational users onto their properties.

 

I don't know if your landlord is aware of such laws or not, which is why I mentioned them. If not, it may give him some level of comfort that he didn't have before.

[+J-Way]

It has been mentioned that there are laws to protect land owners from liability for recreational use of their property. I haven't read through it here is a copy of the PA Recreational Use Law. Read it over. Some states provide more protection than others.

Bringing forward to current page. Also, read the last law example... it specifically mentions that when some idiot fell off an abandoned railroad trestle the landowner was not liable. But it also mentions that a later case (the one right above it) may directly contradict that ruling. Either way, just because you are not liable doesn't mean that someone can't sue you hoping for a cash settlement. Even if a judge dismisses the case at the first hearing you'll still be on the hook for legal bills.

 

One option that might help you is to put "No Tresspassing" signs on the bridge. People just wanting to fish will leave those alone, unless they're fishing off the bridge. Maybe even better, put up "Warning - Unsafe Structure" signs on the bridge.

[+Horticulture]

Fascinating thread. Looking forward to hearing the official answer from the county surveyor lady.

 

The Google Maps for my area incorrectly show dozens of private lanes as roads. Fortunately, the counties here mark every public road with a road sign, even the grass lanes, so it's usually easy to tell the real roads from the private ones.

[+Renegade Knight]

First off let me say that if the land owner says the land is off limits I think we should accept that.

 

It has been mentioned that there are laws to protect land owners from liability for recreational use of their property. I haven't read through it here is a copy of the PA Recreational Use Law. Read it over. Some states provide more protection than others.

 

Idaho has a similar law. A person who doesn't charge for recreational use of their lands is not liable for any injuries that happen on their land. On a bike path project I had a land owner insist on having the county pay for insurance against liability to put the bike path on their land...which opened them up to the liability since now they were charging for the use of their lands...

[+Renegade Knight]

Fascinating thread. Looking forward to hearing the official answer from the county surveyor lady.

 

The Google Maps for my area incorrectly show dozens of private lanes as roads. Fortunately, the counties here mark every public road with a road sign, even the grass lanes, so it's usually easy to tell the real roads from the private ones.

 

Locally they mark private roads with blue signs and public ones with green. They don't mark the public ROW that hasn't been developed into a road. In some cases the ROW shows up on maps as roads, when it's nothing but sombodies field (who's encroaching on the ROW and who won't be happy when they finally do build a road).

[+bittsen]

First off let me say that if the land owner says the land is off limits I think we should accept that.

 

I wouldn't accept the word of someone who claims to own land that it appears he doesn't own. I've been in too many battles where people say "it's my property" and it wasn't.

Some owners just like to assert their ownership to keep people away from their property (as opposed to keeping people OFF their property) and that is just not acceptable. Adding that this belief of mine is separate to any geocaching issue.

[+Jackalgirl]

Hi June16,

 

Just another thing to consider here that I have not seen mentioned yet - Just because the cache is archived now, that doesn't mean you won't have a geocacher wander in for the next month or so.

 

The reason for this is some cachers preload their GPSr and then it may be weeks before they go out and actually do any caching - not my preferred method but everyone participates in this hobby differently...

 

I felt it prudent to mention this as not all cachers follow the forums.

 

Oh, and welcome to geocaching! Not many of us can claim such an interesting introduction into this hobby.

 

Hmmm.... sound like possible inspiration for a new thread - "What's the story on your conversion from muggle to geocacher"

 

I thank everyone for their cordial conversation. I realize this is sensetive issue for geocachers, seeing one removed and I feel everyone on here has responded in a civilized way. I did think about people trickling in due to the things you stated and that is understandable. My philosophy on approaching trespassers is to be very friendly and cordial right away and proceed based on their reaction. If they say "Sorry about that", I say "Not a problem, thank you". If they get rude, I get rude back. Only one person has gotten rude so far and he was a road hunter and that's a whole different story. He disappeared when I started calling the cops.

 

To Clan Riffster involving the pull-off. There is nothing indicating that it is private property now because the sign I did put up was ripped down, torn to pieces and left lying at the bottom of the tree where I put it. I was looking at getting some metal signs made to make it a little more permanent, but I'm sure they'll get bent, broken or all-together removed. I put up about 7 No Trespassing signs at the request of the landowner and 5 of them were tore down within a month, so it's pretty frustrating.

 

I think your best bet would be to do something that is non-removeable and impedes the parking of the cars: jersey barriers have been recommended, as well as landscaping.

 

They're more expensive options but I think that it would be a more permanent and discouraging solution (tho I think the idea of metal NO TRESPASSING signs is a good idea anyway). Also, preventing people from parking in the first place will help prevent angst and anger and possible retaliation from the tow-truck option, as satisfying as that might be (or, ultimately, necessary, if people just simply don't get the hint).

[+Wadcutter]

The following log is what can happen when one assumes permission has been granted by the landowner. Turned out the person placing the cache had their coords off by 1/4 mile. The listed coords took you to near a farmer's barn about 150 ft from his house.

 

June 20 by Innocent Cacher (11811 found)

Super bad coords!!!

Farmer chased us off with a shot gun,

looked like he was going nuts about people

walking around his yard.

In my opinion, these and aparently other cachers were way off base. If I saw it in someones yard - and I have - If I do not have explicite permission, I will not go. If I go home, check the listing and there is no explicite permission, I'll send a note, DNF and maybe a Needs Archived, depending on the circumstances.

 

As a cache finder, we have a responsability to do the right thing. Never should we assume, although it does happen.

 

Although, I too have been chased off with a shotgun, even while being on a public road. But again, not the right time to argue.

 

Double checking coords in Google Earth saves so much headache (and double checking the post before publication occurs)

 

Thanks to June16 for being very level headed about this, with the issues of the No Tresspassing signs being removed, that would frustrate me to no end.

 

It was too close to a house which is why we passed it by. We don't like going that close to anyone's house whether permission was granted or not. However, we have seen caches that were placed closer to houses and private building and had permission.

[+cantuland]

This is a case where the land holder has made it clear that law or no law, they wish no part of our activities on their land. In my ever to be so humble opinion, then we need to honor that request, and leave it be.

I am licensed to practice land surveying in the state of Kansas. I know (usuall) where the boundaries are, and where the ownership is and isn't. When a muggle says that my geocache is "too close to their property", then it affects them in a negative way and I move it. I've done it before, even when I think I'm legally in the right.

[GOF and Bacall]

First off let me say that if the land owner says the land is off limits I think we should accept that.

 

I wouldn't accept the word of someone who claims to own land that it appears he doesn't own. I've been in too many battles where people say "it's my property" and it wasn't.

Some owners just like to assert their ownership to keep people away from their property (as opposed to keeping people OFF their property) and that is just not acceptable. Adding that this belief of mine is separate to any geocaching issue.

 

From a geocaching point of view it could be a loosing battle right or wrong. First off how many times will the container disappear? The landowner who thinks it is on a part of their property isn't going to just leave it be. Second off how many times is this person going to confront searchers and do you want to put others in this position? Better to find another place for your cache.

[+Castle Mischief]

First off let me say that if the land owner says the land is off limits I think we should accept that.

 

I wouldn't accept the word of someone who claims to own land that it appears he doesn't own. I've been in too many battles where people say "it's my property" and it wasn't.

Some owners just like to assert their ownership to keep people away from their property (as opposed to keeping people OFF their property) and that is just not acceptable. Adding that this belief of mine is separate to any geocaching issue.

 

So it's okay with you if I camp out just on the other side of you proopery line and just, you know, hang out for several hours?

[+sbell111]

First off let me say that if the land owner says the land is off limits I think we should accept that.

 

I wouldn't accept the word of someone who claims to own land that it appears he doesn't own. I've been in too many battles where people say "it's my property" and it wasn't.

Some owners just like to assert their ownership to keep people away from their property (as opposed to keeping people OFF their property) and that is just not acceptable. Adding that this belief of mine is separate to any geocaching issue.

 

So it's okay with you if I camp out just on the other side of you proopery line and just, you know, hang out for several hours?

Why would anyone care if you camped out on someone else's property?

[+Castle Mischief]

First off let me say that if the land owner says the land is off limits I think we should accept that.

 

I wouldn't accept the word of someone who claims to own land that it appears he doesn't own. I've been in too many battles where people say "it's my property" and it wasn't.

Some owners just like to assert their ownership to keep people away from their property (as opposed to keeping people OFF their property) and that is just not acceptable. Adding that this belief of mine is separate to any geocaching issue.

 

So it's okay with you if I camp out just on the other side of you proopery line and just, you know, hang out for several hours?

Why would anyone care if you camped out on someone else's property?

Would it bother you if it was in view of your house?

[+Renegade Knight]

First off let me say that if the land owner says the land is off limits I think we should accept that.

 

I wouldn't accept the word of someone who claims to own land that it appears he doesn't own. I've been in too many battles where people say "it's my property" and it wasn't.

Some owners just like to assert their ownership to keep people away from their property (as opposed to keeping people OFF their property) and that is just not acceptable. Adding that this belief of mine is separate to any geocaching issue.

 

So it's okay with you if I camp out just on the other side of you proopery line and just, you know, hang out for several hours?

Why would anyone care if you camped out on someone else's property?

Would it bother you if it was in view of your house?

I live next to a park. You get used to it. The most obnoxious thing I have to deal with is the "Blue View"

 

[+ngrrfan]

I live next to a park. You get used to it. The most obnoxious thing I have to deal with is the "Blue View"

 

That's no park...... That's a HOTEL!!

[+niraD]

Why would anyone care if you camped out on someone else's property?

Some people do care. Our homeowner association CC&Rs prohibit pitching a tent overnight in our yard.

[+bittsen]

First off let me say that if the land owner says the land is off limits I think we should accept that.

 

I wouldn't accept the word of someone who claims to own land that it appears he doesn't own. I've been in too many battles where people say "it's my property" and it wasn't.

Some owners just like to assert their ownership to keep people away from their property (as opposed to keeping people OFF their property) and that is just not acceptable. Adding that this belief of mine is separate to any geocaching issue.

 

So it's okay with you if I camp out just on the other side of you proopery line and just, you know, hang out for several hours?

 

Why not? People do it all the time. They are called

Neighbors"

 

I recall a particularly interesting morning when a bunch of protestors lined the street I lived on. I politely asked them to not stand in front of my house. They argued that they had every right to the sidewalk in front of my house which I had no recourse. They were right, of course. So I let my dog in the front yard to do what he did best. He liked to bark at people on the other side of the fence.

 

If there was a geocache right in front of my house on the public property, I would have no legal recourse. That is just the way it is.

[+sbell111]

Why would anyone care if you camped out on someone else's property?

Some people do care. Our homeowner association CC&Rs prohibit pitching a tent overnight in our yard.

Then they can do something about it. Similarly, if a cache breaks a law, something should be done about it. However, if a cache doesn't break a law (or a guideline), I am not excited if some random person whines about it.

 

In my opinion, that spot would be good for one of JoGPS's super difficult caches.

Edited August 25, 2009 by sbell111

[June16]

First off let me say that if the land owner says the land is off limits I think we should accept that.

 

I wouldn't accept the word of someone who claims to own land that it appears he doesn't own. I've been in too many battles where people say "it's my property" and it wasn't.

Some owners just like to assert their ownership to keep people away from their property (as opposed to keeping people OFF their property) and that is just not acceptable. Adding that this belief of mine is separate to any geocaching issue.

 

So people can camp on your front yard and don't have to leave until you PROVE to them that you own it? I've NEVER claimed to own the land. I rent from the landowners. Please read all comments before you post.

 

Something sounds shady anyway if you are "in too many battles...". You sound like you just like to start stuff anyway.

[+paleolith]

Googlemap still shows a road on our property that hasn't been there in over 60 years.

I have not totally figured out where Google gets all these old "roads". At one time I thought they must be drawing on some database of very old roads. But I've also seen them show "roads" which have never been roads, just rocky ridges which happen to follow a nearly straight line for a while, and these usually have a generic name like "XYZ State Park". So now I'm thinking that some of this comes from software analyzing images.

 

Technically the road data on Google Maps comes from Tele-Atlas (who at least have an error reporting system on their web site, haven't had a chance to find out if things get corrected). Google used to use NAVTEQ, and I've read that the other maps sites mostly still use NAVTEQ. I did get a couple of errors corrected on NAVTEQ. Unfortunately Google went for a couple of years without updates, so the corrections never made it to Google. Never found out why, perhaps Google and NAVTEQ had disagreements over the price of updates. So watch out for lack of updates as well as these pentimento roads.

 

Edward

[+bittsen]

First off let me say that if the land owner says the land is off limits I think we should accept that.

 

I wouldn't accept the word of someone who claims to own land that it appears he doesn't own. I've been in too many battles where people say "it's my property" and it wasn't.

Some owners just like to assert their ownership to keep people away from their property (as opposed to keeping people OFF their property) and that is just not acceptable. Adding that this belief of mine is separate to any geocaching issue.

 

So people can camp on your front yard and don't have to leave until you PROVE to them that you own it? I've NEVER claimed to own the land. I rent from the landowners. Please read all comments before you post.

 

Something sounds shady anyway if you are "in too many battles...". You sound like you just like to start stuff anyway.

A little judgmental on your part, it seems.

When I say I won't take the word of someone claiming to be a land owner (or in your case, renter) I meant land that appears, for all practical purposes, to be public land.

If I'm walking on a beach and all of a sudden someone comes out screaming it's their personal beach, I am more prone to say polite profanities (if they were aggressive) or listen to their story (if they approached respectfully). Of course, here in Oregon, there is no ownership of ocean beaches. They belong to the public. There have been court battles by those who assumed they owned the beach. They lost.

 

If I were walking through the forest and someone claimed it was their property I would have a similar reaction. The same goes for walking along abandoned railroad tracks (abandoned!!). Or along abandoned roads.

 

I am a free person in the United states. Nobody has a right to push me off of land that they don't own. Deal with it.

[+fegan]

First off let me say that if the land owner says the land is off limits I think we should accept that.

 

I wouldn't accept the word of someone who claims to own land that it appears he doesn't own. I've been in too many battles where people say "it's my property" and it wasn't.

Some owners just like to assert their ownership to keep people away from their property (as opposed to keeping people OFF their property) and that is just not acceptable. Adding that this belief of mine is separate to any geocaching issue.

 

So people can camp on your front yard and don't have to leave until you PROVE to them that you own it? I've NEVER claimed to own the land. I rent from the landowners. Please read all comments before you post.

 

Something sounds shady anyway if you are "in too many battles...". You sound like you just like to start stuff anyway.

A little judgmental on your part, it seems.

When I say I won't take the word of someone claiming to be a land owner (or in your case, renter) I meant land that appears, for all practical purposes, to be public land.

If I'm walking on a beach and all of a sudden someone comes out screaming it's their personal beach, I am more prone to say polite profanities (if they were aggressive) or listen to their story (if they approached respectfully). Of course, here in Oregon, there is no ownership of ocean beaches. They belong to the public. There have been court battles by those who assumed they owned the beach. They lost.

 

If I were walking through the forest and someone claimed it was their property I would have a similar reaction. The same goes for walking along abandoned railroad tracks (abandoned!!). Or along abandoned roads.

 

I am a free person in the United states. Nobody has a right to push me off of land that they don't own. Deal with it.

 

Sorry bittsen...but I really think you're out of line here.

[+Renegade Knight]

Why would anyone care if you camped out on someone else's property?

Some people do care. Our homeowner association CC&Rs prohibit pitching a tent overnight in our yard.

This is why I don't like homewowners associations. They get into your business on things that don't matter to anyone but yuppies utterly convinced that the value of their own home is the most important thing in the world and should preclude any land use they find to be objectionable. Of which there are plenty of things that normal folks do.

[+bittsen]

Sorry bittsen...but I really think you're out of line here.

Don't be sorry. You are entitled to your opinion.

I thought the use of the smiley would have shown that I wasn't angry in my last line but playfully sarcastic. I must have been mistaken.

[+Team Cotati]

I have only joined this forum to politely ask how to have a geocache removed from our property. The other night we had 2 people walk onto our property just before dark to try to find a cached spot in a cemeteray that wasn't actually even on our property. Through researching all of this, I actually did end up finding another one on our property. After looking at the logs of the cache that IS on our property, I was alarmed to read that about 70 people had cached the site and not ONE single person has EVER come to our house to ask if they could be on the property. I have e-mailed the person who it seems has created the cache to have it removed, but I haven't had a response yet. How can this geocache be removed from our private property?

 

Post a note in the log so future cache hunters will know that you've removed it. Then go get it and put it in your garage. Send an email to the owner telling him what you have done, copy the local reviewer. If you do not get a response within 30 days, then send the local reviewer and request that it be archived. Wait another 30 days for the owner to contact you, if he doesn't keep it or toss it, whatever you choose. People can't just leave stuff on your property because it strikes their fancy to do so. You need no one's permission to remove stuff from your own personal private property once you have made reasonable efforst to locate the owner.

 

The cache owner ought to be grateful that a fellow cacher found it and not a muggle property owner.

[GOF and Bacall]

I have only joined this forum to politely ask how to have a geocache removed from our property. The other night we had 2 people walk onto our property just before dark to try to find a cached spot in a cemeteray that wasn't actually even on our property. Through researching all of this, I actually did end up finding another one on our property. After looking at the logs of the cache that IS on our property, I was alarmed to read that about 70 people had cached the site and not ONE single person has EVER come to our house to ask if they could be on the property. I have e-mailed the person who it seems has created the cache to have it removed, but I haven't had a response yet. How can this geocache be removed from our private property?

 

Post a note in the log so future cache hunters will know that you've removed it. Then go get it and put it in your garage. Send an email to the owner telling him what you have done, copy the local reviewer. If you do not get a response within 30 days, then send the local reviewer and request that it be archived. Wait another 30 days for the owner to contact you, if he doesn't keep it or toss it, whatever you choose. People can't just leave stuff on your property because it strikes their fancy to do so. You need no one's permission to remove stuff from your own personal private property once you have made reasonable efforst to locate the owner.

 

The cache owner ought to be grateful that a fellow cacher found it and not a muggle property owner.

 

This thread has gone way past that point.

[+Ms.Scrabbler]

When this thread started I felt proud to be part of the caching community because my experience has been 99% good all around. Posts at first were considerate and helpful but seem to have turned away from that.

 

There is no way any of us or the OP can solve this until the property owners are established. I'm looking forward to knowing how it turns out and I hope the OP will let us know.

[+mrbort]

This is a case where the land holder has made it clear that law or no law, they wish no part of our activities on their land. In my ever to be so humble opinion, then we need to honor that request, and leave it be.

I am licensed to practice land surveying in the state of Kansas. I know (usuall) where the boundaries are, and where the ownership is and isn't. When a muggle says that my geocache is "too close to their property", then it affects them in a negative way and I move it. I've done it before, even when I think I'm legally in the right.

 

This is a great point. It's about civility and politeness. If, for some reason, I decided to camp out/protest/[whatever other hypothetical activity we can think of] in front of bittsen's house and he came out and asked me to move, I almost certainly would (depending on the manner in which he asked). This isn't because I legally have to do that but because it's the polite thing to do. This is less about civil liberties and more about being good to one another. Politeness and consideration (even when undeserved or unmerited) make us stronger as a society and do not necessarily erode our civil liberties, especially in a case like this. We're nit picking over a small strip of land in the middle of private property; this isn't as if someone came along and decreed that a city park is their property.

 

A little judgmental on your part, it seems.

When I say I won't take the word of someone claiming to be a land owner (or in your case, renter) I meant land that appears, for all practical purposes, to be public land.

If I'm walking on a beach and all of a sudden someone comes out screaming it's their personal beach, I am more prone to say polite profanities (if they were aggressive) or listen to their story (if they approached respectfully). Of course, here in Oregon, there is no ownership of ocean beaches. They belong to the public. There have been court battles by those who assumed they owned the beach. They lost.

 

If I were walking through the forest and someone claimed it was their property I would have a similar reaction. The same goes for walking along abandoned railroad tracks (abandoned!!). Or along abandoned roads.

 

I am a free person in the United states. Nobody has a right to push me off of land that they don't own. Deal with it.

 

Sorry bittsen...but I really think you're out of line here.

 

And I'm not sorry; I completely agree that this type of belligerent response is out of line and uncalled for. The OP has gone far far out of his or her way to be reasonable and pleasant in his or her posts. A combative approach to the discussion does not further it in a positive direction.

[+ecanderson]

I have not totally figured out where Google gets all these old "roads". At one time I thought they must be drawing on some database of very old roads. But I've also seen them show "roads" which have never been roads, just rocky ridges which happen to follow a nearly straight line for a while, and these usually have a generic name like "XYZ State Park". So now I'm thinking that some of this comes from software analyzing images.

Indeed they do. I've found that wide, concrete, open drainage ditches up the sides of hills even show up once in a while here in Colorado. They're picking up high contrast, straight features and making some bad assumptions.

[knowschad]

Sorry bittsen...but I really think you're out of line here.

 

And I'm not sorry; I completely agree that this type of belligerent response is out of line and uncalled for. The OP has gone far far out of his or her way to be reasonable and pleasant in his or her posts. A combative approach to the discussion does not further it in a positive direction.

 

 

I agree 100%. I was a bit shocked to see that comment, given that the OP has been so willing to work with us, listen to and exchange ideas with an open mind, and been just plain all around friendly.

[Motorcycle_Mama]

Let's keep the discussion on topic and in accordance with the forum rules. If you can't do that, don't post. Thanks.

[+thorsnrh]

June16--

 

I would like respond here to one of your concerns, regarding permission to enter a property. I am new to this sport/hobby, but I do want to make a point that really hasn't been made yet. I live in an urban area, and around here, the VAST MAJORITY of caches are in obviously public places--city parks, state parks, national forest areas, regional parks, public recreation areas, etc, etc. I don't need to ask permission or wonder about ownership when I go cache'ing. I just wanted you to know that not all caches are placed in areas that are questionable. I don't want you to get turned off of geocaching by all the legal discussion here. Hopefully, when your situation is resolved, you will give geocaching a try and have fun exploring new parts of your neighborhood.

[+AstroDav]

 

I wouldn't accept the word of someone who claims to own land that it appears he doesn't own. I've been in too many battles where people say "it's my property" and it wasn't.

Some owners just like to assert their ownership to keep people away from their property (as opposed to keeping people OFF their property) and that is just not acceptable. Adding that this belief of mine is separate to any geocaching issue.

 

Something sounds shady anyway if you are "in too many battles...". You sound like you just like to start stuff anyway.

 

 

I agree completely.

 

There's a VERY easy answer here....if the cache is highly upsetting someone, remove it & park it a couple hundred feet down the road where it WON'T upset someone.

 

Regardless of the exact details...who owns what, who claims what, who can do what where....leaving a cahe in place purely "because you can & are allowed to" is bad publicity as a whole for the geocaching community. Caches must be 528 feet apart. That makes 77,234,523,521 locations in CONUS where you can legally set a cache & not hurt the feelings of a single person. So just WHY would a responsible cacher choose NOT to do that...."because they can"??

 

Personally, if I set a cache & then a local publicly asked for it's removal, it would be about a 1-paragraph, 1-day event...."Sure, sorry I bothered you. I'll pick it up tomorrow first thing"....and then it would be relocated to a better place that wouldn't stir up any emotions whatsoever.

 

But that's just me. And I do believe I am a responsible cacher.

[+sbell111]

I wouldn't accept the word of someone who claims to own land that it appears he doesn't own. I've been in too many battles where people say "it's my property" and it wasn't.

Some owners just like to assert their ownership to keep people away from their property (as opposed to keeping people OFF their property) and that is just not acceptable. Adding that this belief of mine is separate to any geocaching issue.

Something sounds shady anyway if you are "in too many battles...". You sound like you just like to start stuff anyway.

I agree completely.

 

There's a VERY easy answer here....if the cache is highly upsetting someone, remove it & park it a couple hundred feet down the road where it WON'T upset someone.

 

Regardless of the exact details...who owns what, who claims what, who can do what where....leaving a cahe in place purely "because you can & are allowed to" is bad publicity as a whole for the geocaching community. Caches must be 528 feet apart. That makes 77,234,523,521 locations in CONUS where you can legally set a cache & not hurt the feelings of a single person. So just WHY would a responsible cacher choose NOT to do that...."because they can"??

 

Personally, if I set a cache & then a local publicly asked for it's removal, it would be about a 1-paragraph, 1-day event...."Sure, sorry I bothered you. I'll pick it up tomorrow first thing"....and then it would be relocated to a better place that wouldn't stir up any emotions whatsoever.

 

But that's just me. And I do believe I am a responsible cacher.

Ummm....

 

Wouldn't Bittsen's hypothetical cache be placed in one of these '77,234,523,521 locations in CONUS where you can legally set a cache & not hurt the feelings of a single person'?

 

Are you saying that if anyone anywhere has any issue with a cache being placed then the cache shouldn't be there? Even if that person has no authority over the placement location at all?

 

I guess that we should just close down the geocaching.com website because between the 'leave no tracers', various Kravitz relatives, and my wife every single cache should be removed.

Edited August 26, 2009 by sbell111

[+Rockin Roddy]

I wouldn't accept the word of someone who claims to own land that it appears he doesn't own. I've been in too many battles where people say "it's my property" and it wasn't.

Some owners just like to assert their ownership to keep people away from their property (as opposed to keeping people OFF their property) and that is just not acceptable. Adding that this belief of mine is separate to any geocaching issue.

Something sounds shady anyway if you are "in too many battles...". You sound like you just like to start stuff anyway.

I agree completely.

 

There's a VERY easy answer here....if the cache is highly upsetting someone, remove it & park it a couple hundred feet down the road where it WON'T upset someone.

 

Regardless of the exact details...who owns what, who claims what, who can do what where....leaving a cahe in place purely "because you can & are allowed to" is bad publicity as a whole for the geocaching community. Caches must be 528 feet apart. That makes 77,234,523,521 locations in CONUS where you can legally set a cache & not hurt the feelings of a single person. So just WHY would a responsible cacher choose NOT to do that...."because they can"??

 

Personally, if I set a cache & then a local publicly asked for it's removal, it would be about a 1-paragraph, 1-day event...."Sure, sorry I bothered you. I'll pick it up tomorrow first thing"....and then it would be relocated to a better place that wouldn't stir up any emotions whatsoever.

 

But that's just me. And I do believe I am a responsible cacher.

Ummm....

 

Wouldn't Bittsen's hypothetical cache be placed in one of these '77,234,523,521 locations in CONUS where you can legally set a cache & not hurt the feelings of a single person'?

 

Are you saying that if anyone anywhere has any issue with a cache being placed then the cache shouldn't be there? Even if that person has no authority over the placement location at all?

 

I guess that we should just close down the geocaching.com website because between the 'leave no tracers', various Kravitz relatives, and my wife every single cache should be removed.

 

If I placed a cache which asked people to brave the wrath of a nearby landowner who dislikes having people visit nearby (say, for instance, the person feels it's his property, people accidentally trespass etc) and the landowner took things into their own hands (harass cachers etc), I would feel bad about the whole thing and yes, remove the hide. Been there, done that! It's upsetting, but it's life...no sense in making enemies over a cache IMHO!

 

People seem to have this entitlement issue where they feel that they should be able to do anything since it's public property, even if it irks nearby landowners...why? I'm fairly certain there are plenty of places to plant a cache where people appreciate and welcome caching and cachers. Flip the coin, there are plenty of landowners who feel they have jurisdiction over land they don't...doesn't make that person any less of a problem, or right, for that matter!

 

Best to keep your caching friends safe from potential harm...like maybe the farmer who shoots first and asks questions later?? This is my humble opinion and I am certain there are others who will disagree!

[+Rockin Roddy]

June16--

 

I would like respond here to one of your concerns, regarding permission to enter a property. I am new to this sport/hobby, but I do want to make a point that really hasn't been made yet. I live in an urban area, and around here, the VAST MAJORITY of caches are in obviously public places--city parks, state parks, national forest areas, regional parks, public recreation areas, etc, etc. I don't need to ask permission or wonder about ownership when I go cache'ing. I just wanted you to know that not all caches are placed in areas that are questionable. I don't want you to get turned off of geocaching by all the legal discussion here. Hopefully, when your situation is resolved, you will give geocaching a try and have fun exploring new parts of your neighborhood.

 

You don't have to ask permission? To hunt...or to hide? Just curious as to what you meant here!

[+sbell111]

... People seem to have this entitlement issue where they feel that they should be able to do anything since it's public property, even if it irks nearby landowners...why? ...

What you see as 'entitlement', others see as an actual 'freedom'.

June16--

 

I would like respond here to one of your concerns, regarding permission to enter a property. I am new to this sport/hobby, but I do want to make a point that really hasn't been made yet. I live in an urban area, and around here, the VAST MAJORITY of caches are in obviously public places--city parks, state parks, national forest areas, regional parks, public recreation areas, etc, etc. I don't need to ask permission or wonder about ownership when I go cache'ing. I just wanted you to know that not all caches are placed in areas that are questionable. I don't want you to get turned off of geocaching by all the legal discussion here. Hopefully, when your situation is resolved, you will give geocaching a try and have fun exploring new parts of your neighborhood.

You don't have to ask permission? To hunt...or to hide? Just curious as to what you meant here!

If you go back and actually read the thread, you will note that the OP was upset because no one had ever knocked on his door when they came to search for the cache.

[+Rockin Roddy]

... People seem to have this entitlement issue where they feel that they should be able to do anything since it's public property, even if it irks nearby landowners...why? ...

What you see as 'entitlement', others see as an actual 'freedom'.

June16--

 

I would like respond here to one of your concerns, regarding permission to enter a property. I am new to this sport/hobby, but I do want to make a point that really hasn't been made yet. I live in an urban area, and around here, the VAST MAJORITY of caches are in obviously public places--city parks, state parks, national forest areas, regional parks, public recreation areas, etc, etc. I don't need to ask permission or wonder about ownership when I go cache'ing. I just wanted you to know that not all caches are placed in areas that are questionable. I don't want you to get turned off of geocaching by all the legal discussion here. Hopefully, when your situation is resolved, you will give geocaching a try and have fun exploring new parts of your neighborhood.

You don't have to ask permission? To hunt...or to hide? Just curious as to what you meant here!

If you go back and actually read the thread, you will note that the OP was upset because no one had ever knocked on his door when they came to search for the cache.

 

Freedom for what? To irk the neighbor? To allow unsuspecting cachers to get into potential danger? Sometimes, it's best to just remove the cache even if you ARE in the right. I'm sure you'd agree, but for that entitlement freedom issue...

 

And THANKS, I have read the entire thread a few times. Would it be OK if I asked for clarification or do you want to answer for the person??

[+sbell111]

ecanderson, it's funny you mentioned finding out about the railroad, because I asked our landlord that exact same question. My e-mail went something like this: "Can you tell me a little more about the railroad, like where it ran from and who owned it?" I'm still waiting to hear back.

 

Im very interested to know more about this as well

According to Google, it was just a spur that merged with the main line just to the west of Scotland. The other end terminated in Fayetteville where there was probably a factory, quarry or mine.

 

EDIT: Ignore that. Topo shows that it didn't terminate, but used to run as far south as Waynesboro, where it merged with another track.

Edited August 26, 2009 by sbell111

[+sbell111]

... People seem to have this entitlement issue where they feel that they should be able to do anything since it's public property, even if it irks nearby landowners...why? ...

What you see as 'entitlement', others see as an actual 'freedom'.

June16--

 

I would like respond here to one of your concerns, regarding permission to enter a property. I am new to this sport/hobby, but I do want to make a point that really hasn't been made yet. I live in an urban area, and around here, the VAST MAJORITY of caches are in obviously public places--city parks, state parks, national forest areas, regional parks, public recreation areas, etc, etc. I don't need to ask permission or wonder about ownership when I go cache'ing. I just wanted you to know that not all caches are placed in areas that are questionable. I don't want you to get turned off of geocaching by all the legal discussion here. Hopefully, when your situation is resolved, you will give geocaching a try and have fun exploring new parts of your neighborhood.

You don't have to ask permission? To hunt...or to hide? Just curious as to what you meant here!

If you go back and actually read the thread, you will note that the OP was upset because no one had ever knocked on his door when they came to search for the cache.

 

Freedom for what? To irk the neighbor? To allow unsuspecting cachers to get into potential danger?

You honestly believe that we don't have teh freedom to enjoy public lands?

And THANKS, I have read the entire thread a few times. Would it be OK if I asked for clarification or do you want to answer for the person??

Sure it's OK, but you still would have known the answer if you had read the thread (or even the post that you were responding to).