geocaching will die if....

[+ZeroHecksGiven]

...if people don't tread lightly around cache sites. I've now been to three, out of the 85 caches I've been to, that were destroyed. I'm not talking about the cache, I'm talking about the 20 foot radius around it. There is a cache out towards the coast I had been meaning to check it out, last person DNF'd it, but I figured it's right off the road and I'm driving by it, so I'll check it out. Supposedly there is this old weird shack thing out there that looks like a troll lived in or something. Anyways, i went out and I had to DNF it as well, but the people there before me tore the place up looking for it. Actually taking pieces of wood off the shack to try and find it. Ripping up this dead stump the shack was attached to, plants were beaten down and it looked horrible, nothing serene about it. Two other cache sites were close to this and many others were noticeably tore up. Even in the short time I've been caching, it's not THAT hard to find a cache, no need to really tear the place apart, even for a micro and sure, if you do need to pull an entire guard rail apart to see if there are micros in bolts, fine, put it back together. We're talking legit crimes at this point, destruction of property. I rode BMX and skated for over ten years, it doesn't take much to get someone upset about touching things, even if it isn't there property, just a "concerned" citizen.

 

What's with people? I know you wanna find the cache, but is there really a need for this? I can see why forest service people are removing caches(I didn't read into that thread, not trying to flame). Just in general, people will notice this and not be so inclined to grant permission for caches anymore, laws like the recent one passed in SC I think will become more frequent if people don't start taking it easy. If this means better hints/spoilers, then so be it. Just hate to see amazing locations archived.

[+Renegade Knight]

...if people don't tread lightly around cache sites. I've now been to three, out of the 85 caches I've been to, that were destroyed. ...

 

A year after the cache is gone, the area will be fine. Destroyed is like a spill on our interstate that left a dead zone. Nothing grows.

 

It's true that folks do cause an undue impact that they could avoid with even the least care. However having seen the filth that some folks live in, the concept is beyond some and so we owners end up having to compensate as we can.

 

Good luck.

[+bittsen]

...if people don't tread lightly around cache sites. I've now been to three, out of the 85 caches I've been to, that were destroyed. I'm not talking about the cache, I'm talking about the 20 foot radius around it. There is a cache out towards the coast I had been meaning to check it out, last person DNF'd it, but I figured it's right off the road and I'm driving by it, so I'll check it out. Supposedly there is this old weird shack thing out there that looks like a troll lived in or something. Anyways, i went out and I had to DNF it as well, but the people there before me tore the place up looking for it. Actually taking pieces of wood off the shack to try and find it. Ripping up this dead stump the shack was attached to, plants were beaten down and it looked horrible, nothing serene about it. Two other cache sites were close to this and many others were noticeably tore up. Even in the short time I've been caching, it's not THAT hard to find a cache, no need to really tear the place apart, even for a micro and sure, if you do need to pull an entire guard rail apart to see if there are micros in bolts, fine, put it back together. We're talking legit crimes at this point, destruction of property. I rode BMX and skated for over ten years, it doesn't take much to get someone upset about touching things, even if it isn't there property, just a "concerned" citizen.

 

What's with people? I know you wanna find the cache, but is there really a need for this? I can see why forest service people are removing caches(I didn't read into that thread, not trying to flame). Just in general, people will notice this and not be so inclined to grant permission for caches anymore, laws like the recent one passed in SC I think will become more frequent if people don't start taking it easy. If this means better hints/spoilers, then so be it. Just hate to see amazing locations archived.

I feel your pain but you have to remember that there are bad apples everywhere. Most all people who use spray paint do so responsibly but some spray other peoples buildings and other structures.

Most people drive without being intoxicated.

Most people would never injure an animal for fun.

 

And most people would treat nature with respect while caching.

 

But there are the bad apples. There is nothing you can do to stop it and ending the hobby of geocaching won't solve the problem. You would have to ban hundreds of other forms of recreation to stop it. Even if you banned all the other forms of recreation, the destruction would continue because those who destroy would also break the law.

[DecemberSpill]

What was the law recently passed in SC?

[+steve p]

Supposedly there is this old weird shack thing out there that looks like a troll lived in or something. Anyways, i went out and I had to DNF it as well, but the people there before me tore the place up looking for it. Actually taking pieces of wood off the shack to try and find it. Ripping up this dead stump the shack was attached to, plants were beaten down and it looked horrible, nothing serene about it.

And it's not possible that some of the people tearing up the shack were not geocachers? Let's not indiscriminately blame geocachers for every bit of destruction of abandoned shacks in the woods.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

I've found a few thousand caches in 28 states since 2003 and seen this type of thing less than ten times. It happens, thankfully not often, and certainly not enough to seriously hurt the game.

 

Lots of folks mention the SC ban whenever this topic comes up, but don't mention (or even know) the really unique set of circumstances that brought that about.

Edited September 3, 2009 by TheAlabamaRambler

[knowschad]

I got kinda upset once when some caching buddies were kicking up all the needles at the base of every pine tree near ground zero trying to find a King Boreas cache. I want the next cacher that comes along to have the same experience as I did when I arrived (or better). I think that it is inexcusable. But I'm not about to pretend that that sort of behavior is going to bring doom and gloom to geocaching or that it is a disaster that is going to affect generations.

 

 

From what information you have given us in your post, you have no way of knowing what shape that shack was in before the cache was placed, nor how many non-geocaching vandals may visit the site.

[+geodarts]

I have seen places torn up by caching. And I have also seen places trashed by noncachers. The best that we can do is to try to make sure that our hides are reasonable so that people can find the container without damaging the area. And when we go to look, we settle for a DNF before doing anything that would damage the location. Some land managers have expressed concerns about the potential for this type of thing and adopted very restrictive policies, but it will not mean the end of caching.

 

In the case cited above, the person who tore up the shack could have taken the cache (that led to the DNFs). So its hard to know who is to blame. But I agree that you should not take a place a apart in looking for a cache, disassemble someone's electrical boxes, leave a guard rail boltless, remove the rocks of a historic stone fence, or do anything other than to leave the place as you found it.

Edited September 3, 2009 by Erickson

[+StarBrand]

I wouldn't be so quick to blame cachers for what you are seeing. It is, of course, possible but not any reasonable certainty.

 

I've seen a lot of really torn up areas while out hiking with no cache anywhere nearby. It happens.

[+ZeroHecksGiven]

The only reason for the title is the other thread going in another part of the forums.

 

The only reason I blame geocachers is because I know it was them. Obviously this isn't going to change things, just a poopy thing to see this often since I'm pretty new to the "game". I'll just say, one cache, there is no reason anyone would have been there besides looking at a cache and when the last DNF two days previous says somethign along the lines of, "we searched EVERYWHERE for over an hour, on the stump, in the shack, on the shack" and I'm there two days later and the place is a mess, seems obvious to me. Second one, a buddy was there to make a FTF, him and six people could not find this cache. I showed up after dinner with the parents, took me an hour, but I got the FTF, give the guy a couple hints and when he returned a day later, said it looked like a bomb went off in comparison to when he was there a day previous. So I think my accusations have some merit.

 

Regardless, I've been involved in tons of sports and hobbies over the years(disc golf, BMX, jetskis, fishing) and there are always those cool guys who don't show enough respect, so I can see what's going on. Just figured I'd rant for a minute today.

 

As far as the SC deal, I didn't look into it toooo much, so I probably shouldn't have mentioned it at all, so sorry about that, from a quick glance, doesn't look good, regardless of what happened.

[+mfamilee]

The only reason I blame geocachers is because I know it was them. Obviously this isn't going to change things, just a poopy thing to see this often since I'm pretty new to the "game". I'll just say, one cache, there is no reason anyone would have been there besides looking at a cache and when the last DNF two days previous says somethign along the lines of, "we searched EVERYWHERE for over an hour, on the stump, in the shack, on the shack" and I'm there two days later and the place is a mess, seems obvious to me. Second one, a buddy was there to make a FTF, him and six people could not find this cache. I showed up after dinner with the parents, took me an hour, but I got the FTF, give the guy a couple hints and when he returned a day later, said it looked like a bomb went off in comparison to when he was there a day previous. So I think my accusations have some merit.

Did you CITO all the mess?

[+briansnat]

I've found a few thousand caches in 28 states since 2003 and seen this type of thing less than ten times. It happens, thankfully not often, and certainly not enough to seriously hurt the game.

 

Lots of folks mention the SC ban whenever this topic comes up, but don't mention (or even know) the really unique set of circumstances that brought that about.

 

I don't have nearly the same number of finds as you do, but the instances where I've seen real damage have been non existent.

 

In maybe a dozen instances I encountered some bent blades of grass, some overturned rocks or some rotting stumps that where pulled apart. That has been the worst of the worst and it has been extremely rare. None of what I saw was damage in any respect. In the worst cases it was similar to what a bear does looking for grubs. Granted it doesn't look good for our sport if the wrong person were to see it, but if the cache was pulled, within 6 months nobody would know it was ever there. Heck, of all the hundreds of caches I've found in the woods there is usually no visible evidence whatsoever that a cache is there.

Edited September 3, 2009 by briansnat

[+ZeroHecksGiven]

CITO pieces of wood and bolts to a guardrail? I guess I could....

 

I'm visiting one of the cache sites I'm talking about tomorrow. I had to DNF it since it was gone, cache is back in action, so we'll see. Even the CO of that cache site made notes about not tearing apart the shack. If it's still tore up, I'll try to grab some pics for ya'll.

 

But, I'm not talking about a ripped up plant or stomped on grass. I'm talking legit destruction. This shack in the woods was probably built over 50 years ago, if not longer. Delicate and will be gone with the wind at some point, but for now, it's there and holding up and I would never have known about it unless this cache was there. Now do you think if someone comes along and rips up half the shack, taking pieces of the structure off of it to search for a "regular" sized cache is cool? If the cache is removed, the structure is still in pieces 6 months from that point.

 

I see the point some of you are trying to make, which is fine and I can take some foot traffic and maybe some rough searching. But when guardrails are being unbolted and left for someone else to fix and this cool shack in the middle of nowhere is being tore up, just bums me out a bit...

[+L0ne.R]

Photos. I'd really like to see some photo evidence when I read posts about how cachers have torn up a site. Don't most people have a digital camera? My cell phone has a camera and I carry an old digital 3MP camera in my backpack.

[tttedzeins]

What was the law recently passed in SC?

 

Dadgum you beat me to it. And why do you supose that they passed that law (not only in SC but in other countries as well)

 

(edited to say that I am amazed that the forum software changed my word to dadgum)

Edited September 3, 2009 by tttedzeins

[tttedzeins]

I wouldn't be so quick to blame cachers for what you are seeing. It is, of course, possible but not any reasonable certainty.

 

I've seen a lot of really torn up areas while out hiking with no cache anywhere nearby. It happens.

 

Yeah but the OP is talking about a cache site with a cache nearby.

How easy we try to proclaim our innocence. There certain caches I will not look for cos I think that I will cause too much disruption to the surrounding enviroment.

[knowschad]

If, as you say with reasonable confidence, some cachers did vandalize the shack in looking for a cache, that is certainly wayyyyy out of line, and unneccessary, to say the least, and they should be called to task for it. None of us should be behaving that way. Also, I've never seen a cache that required tearing anything apart to find it.

 

 

 

However, I must add that to say it will mean the end of geocaching is certainly hyperbole.

[+Castle Mischief]

What was the law recently passed in SC?

 

Dadgum you beat me to it. And why do you supose that they passed that law (not only in SC but in other countries as well)

 

South Carolina seceded again?

[+Snoogans]

geocaching will die if....

 

Snoogans wills it!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 3, 2009 by Snoogans

[tttedzeins]

What was the law recently passed in SC?

 

Dadgum you beat me to it. And why do you supose that they passed that law (not only in SC but in other countries as well)

 

South Carolina seceded again?

 

I believe they are still annoyed about the last time ...

[+bflentje]

I've found a few thousand caches in 28 states since 2003 and seen this type of thing less than ten times. It happens, thankfully not often, and certainly not enough to seriously hurt the game.

 

Lots of folks mention the SC ban whenever this topic comes up, but don't mention (or even know) the really unique set of circumstances that brought that about.

 

I don't have nearly the same number of finds as you do, but the instances where I've seen real damage have been non existent.

 

In maybe a dozen instances I encountered some bent blades of grass, some overturned rocks or some rotting stumps that where pulled apart. That has been the worst of the worst and it has been extremely rare. None of what I saw was damage in any respect. In the worst icases it was similar to what a bear does looking for grubs. If the cache was pulled, within 6 months nobody would know it was there. Heck, of all the hundreds of caches I've found in the woods there is no evidence whatsoever that a cache is there.

 

In my 3000 finds I know of only two cases where the area was shredded. Beyond those two cases, I double ditto your post.

[tjrenegade]

One thing I think can help avoid this is when listing a cache, be descriptive of the cache container and where NOT to look. I'm not saying you have to give away the location but the more info you can give the cacher the less tearing up. Another thing is put in a hint that's useful.

All that being said if your trying to create a difficult hide that's another story. However I have searched for caches marked 1 terrain and 1 difficulty...no hint, and little description that were very difficult to find.

[+L0ne.R]

One thing I think can help avoid this is when listing a cache, be descriptive of the cache container and where NOT to look. I'm not saying you have to give away the location but the more info you can give the cacher the less tearing up. Another thing is put in a hint that's useful.

All that being said if your trying to create a difficult hide that's another story. However I have searched for caches marked 1 terrain and 1 difficulty...no hint, and little description that were very difficult to find.

 

And, as a concerned finder, go to the source. Posting a lament on the forums is educational but it doesn't educate the CO of the cache where the damage is occurring (unless he/she reads this particular thread, which is highly unlikely). Post a note with a photo showing the damage. Request that the CO provide a better hint to decrease damage.

[+welch]

I wouldn't be so quick to blame cachers for what you are seeing. It is, of course, possible but not any reasonable certainty.

 

I've seen a lot of really torn up areas while out hiking with no cache anywhere nearby. It happens.

 

Yeah but the OP is talking about a cache site with a cache nearby.

How easy we try to proclaim our innocence. There certain caches I will not look for cos I think that I will cause too much disruption to the surrounding enviroment.

 

If there is a 'old weird shack thing' there then some suspicion should also fall on anyone else that has any interest in such places.

[+ZeroHecksGiven]

I've made comments about it in three times I've seen it in the logs directly and obviously making a comment about it here isn't going to change anything directly, just more of a rant and to see if other people were seeing the same sorts of things. I'll be by the cache site today and grab some pics. I know the CO was out there to replace the ammo can, so he may have cleaned it up as best he could while he was there. The cache is almost 75 miles from my house and it's been three weeks since I've been there, so who knows.

Maybe coming from disc golf where breaking bushes down and making a clearer path is highly frowned upon has got me all worked up.

 

Regardless, I'll be sure to take better pics when/if it happens again.

 

[+Renegade Knight]

.... I'm talking legit destruction. This shack in the woods was probably built over 50 years ago, if not longer. ...

 

A cache in the vicinity is always easy to blame. However I've not ever seen a building taken apart to find a cache. My question for you is, where is the tie in to a cacher as opposed to a garden variety vandal?

[+larryc43230]

Regardless, I'll be sure to take better pics when/if it happens again.

I've been lurking on this thread for a while now, and I continue to have a question that no one has answered: Unless you catch someone red-handed, how can you possibly know who did the vandalizing? Taking photos of the damage isn't likely to provide any evidence one way or the other as to who did the vandalizing, it just proves that damage was done.

 

That spot was interesting enough (for whatever reason) to the cache owner for them to hide a cache there; it could be an attractive spot for others, for similar reasons. I'm not saying cachers didn't do the damage, but there are a lot more non-cachers than there are cachers in the woods. Regarding the fact that the damage was done after a visit by cache seekers, this reminds of that logical fallacy I semi-learned in college: post hoc, ergo propter hoc. You can look it up.

 

--Larry

[knowschad]

I know the CO was out there to replace the ammo can, .

 

 

Huh? Wait... hold on a sec!! We're talking about an AMMO CAN here? I thought for sure this had to be a micro!

 

 

Also, if the cache owner had to go out to replace the ammo can, then who was it that stole the ammo can in the first place, and how did they stumble across it if it was hidden that well? Or are you perhaps thinking the damage was done while cashers were trying to find a missing container?

[+Castle Mischief]

Hmmm... freaky old shack, missing ammo can, signs of damage to the flora...

 

Sounds more like a homeless hangout or somebody's secret "special" spot.

[+Sioneva]

Hmmm... freaky old shack, missing ammo can, signs of damage to the flora...

 

Sounds more like a homeless hangout or somebody's secret "special" spot.

 

Shhh! No one is supposed to know about my secret "special" spot!

 

Er...

[+iwikepie]

The first cache i ever had was an ammo can off the trail about 30 feet. We have very tall redwoods in Santa Cruz so GPS readings are usually terrible in the woods.

People destroyed the area around the cache (of course I got blamed) badly enough so that it was archived.

 

 

When we were in NY there were a couple cache on a river near where we were staying. We did these caches and one of them was a micro on a remote stretch of the river (a micro in the woods...great). There were millions of spots and there was nothing of signifigance at the spot. A team of 5 people couldn't find within 45 minutes but i checked one spot off the coords and found it. I tore up the area not because i thought the cache was there, but i was just too frustrated (i kicked over a stump).

 

Sometimes it IS the owners fault by providing a bad container size, bad coords and little description about the cache). Sometimes seekers have there "whos needs a hint? I can find this!" and that can lead to things being destroyed and such.

[+89SC]

Photos. I'd really like to see some photo evidence when I read posts about how cachers have torn up a site. Don't most people have a digital camera? My cell phone has a camera and I carry an old digital 3MP camera in my backpack.

 

I found an old van lost in the woods and thought it would make a great first stage for In A Van Down By The River I placed the cache in March and in June I get a log saying someone ripped the passenger side of the van off. It wasn't much of a van to begin with but tearing it apart to find a cache is kind of crazy. Here are before and after pictures:

 

When it was hidden:

 

 

A little over 2 months later:

 

[Clan Riffster]

Are there any logs saying words to the effect of, "I tore the door off and still couldn't find the cache!"?

If not, I don't think it's safe to assume a geocacher did this.

We're not the only folks who go wandering about the woods.

[+bittsen]

Are there any logs saying words to the effect of, "I tore the door off and still couldn't find the cache!"?

If not, I don't think it's safe to assume a geocacher did this.

We're not the only folks who go wandering about the woods.

 

Are you sure geocachers aren't the only ones in the woods? That van could have appeared by magic. Maybe it grew there like a mushroom.

I would honestly be very surprised if a geocacher removes the whole side of the van for the smiley. Smileys just aren't that valuable.

[+ZeroHecksGiven]

I had a long post typed, whatever, not important. I think the shack cache was messed up by cachers and there are several reasons why, regardless of what I think, I was there and all of you weren't so it's easy for you to say it wasn't and for me to think the opposite. The cache is pretty far from people, only had five visits since may and the last two visits were within an hour or two of my arrival and two days.

The other cache I mentioned, a pal of mine was there to get the FTF, spent an hour, couldn't find it, he went back two days later and was surprised how much it had been trashed since then. Seems obvious when it's a parking lot at a mall in a pretty unused area, especially when the areas 35 feet away are untouched.

 

I'm not trying to point fingers or say some cachers are bad people. I honestly want to share these locations with people years from now and it bums me out when I see stuff "walked on" regardless of if it's "one of us" or "one of them" So I apologize for the finger pointing and assumptions, I just wanted to rant a little about what I'm seeing out there and hope people will show a little more respect sometimes, especially us geocachers! Let it die and let's get some caches this weekend!

Edited September 4, 2009 by NWCREW

[+WRASTRO]

I have been curious since the start of this thread about which caches you are discussing. Since I am kind of in your area I am interested, so if you would PM me the cache info I could check them out. I wouldn't share them here.

[+Sol seaker]

I'm afraid I'm in on the thread owner on this one.

 

I live in the pacific northwest and i have seen MANY areas trashed by geocachers.

How do i know it was geocachers who have done the work?

 

One park, really nice huge wooded park, had two prime examples. We walked for over a half hour through perfect wooded areas. No damage. Just nice wooded park. Then all of a sudden, when my GPS said within 20 feet, the park became trashed. Really bad. All the ferns were beaten down, ground bare, plants broken, the whole area trampled badly. This cache was not at it's posted coordinates, but the trashing was.

 

We went to the next cache. Same thing. Nice wooded park, the cache was about 80 feet off from coordinates, worse this time. The whole area right at ground zero was TRASHED. plants distroyed. For about a 50 foot radius around ground zero. This spot was way off the regular path, so the odds of someone just showing up to ground zero who was not a geocachers was rare to begin with, but then for them to trash a nice pefect radius around ground zero and not the rest of the park, in this out of the way spot, way off of the path, no, I dont buy it.

 

I wrote to both cache owners. One shut down her cache right away (although I did not ask her to do that, just asked for her to update coordinates and tell people they didn't need to step off the path). The other guy was quite belligerent, and only in time did he finally decide to update the coordinates, but never provided a clue.

 

I actually came across some kids IN THE ACT OF GEOTRASHING.

I was very new to the game and didn't know how to deal with it. Now I would. It was within my first 20 caches or so. I did get them to stop though. I did confirm that they were indeed geocaching. they were teenagers, who had sticks and were tearing all foilage from all the plants in the area. Really beating the place up bad. This one had a clear clue leading right to where the cache was, they just didn't bother to read it. I showed them the cache and they left.

 

Here in the woods I see this kind of thing all the time. The woods will be pristine right until you get to ground zero, even if ground zero is way off the path. Suddenly, there will be a trashed zone in about a 50 ft. radius around ground zero. Happens all the time here.

 

Mainly the problems are the caches without clues. Actually it has been every time except that once with those kids that there has been no clue.

 

I would love to see reviewers be more specific about including clues in sensitive areas. It's really necessary. The people who hide caches in the woods have GPS's that are bouncing around because of the trees, then the finders are having the same problem. Once I had about a 150 foot radius to search. There are hundreds of possible hiding places in the woods in a space that large.

 

SO often we've had to put our GPS's away and just go by the clue in the woods. If there is no clue it can get nuts. That's where we see the trashing.

 

You guys may question, but it is happening out there, and it is, and will continue to get geocaching thrown out of parks.

[+WRASTRO]

Sol seaker I understand your concern but I believe it is overstated. I have found about 10% of the caches you have found. I have also found well over 2,000 caches that you haven't found, most of which are in the Puget Sound area. While you certainly describe some realities it is absolutely not typical.

 

I would also point out that unless we are discussing certain sensitive areas in western Washington the vast majority of the cache locations easily handle the small amount of traffic caused by geocachers. Cache location is important. Continuing to educate cachers is also important. Predictions of doom and gloom seem to me to be unwarranted.

[knowschad]

It is impossible to go off trail at all without trampling the ferns and such. Is that really "destruction"? I guess that depends on your definition. Imagine if someone (not a cacher) had pitched a tent in a similar area for an overnight stay. That area would also be beaten down, but a month later, you'd never know it.

 

 

I am one that tries to be careful at cache sites.... and I try as much as possible to leave the area looking as I found it. I do know of cachers that will move sticks, kick up dead leaves or pine needles, and make no attempt to put them back in place. That can make the site look like hell to the next cachers, and it really annoys me. But I will not go so far as to call it "destruction"

 

 

As to ripping the door off that van... that sure sounds more like simple juvenile vandals to me.

[+bittsen]

I'm afraid I'm in on the thread owner on this one.

 

I live in the pacific northwest and i have seen MANY areas trashed by geocachers.

How do i know it was geocachers who have done the work?

 

One park, really nice huge wooded park, had two prime examples. We walked for over a half hour through perfect wooded areas. No damage. Just nice wooded park. Then all of a sudden, when my GPS said within 20 feet, the park became trashed. Really bad. All the ferns were beaten down, ground bare, plants broken, the whole area trampled badly. This cache was not at it's posted coordinates, but the trashing was.

 

We went to the next cache. Same thing. Nice wooded park, the cache was about 80 feet off from coordinates, worse this time. The whole area right at ground zero was TRASHED. plants distroyed. For about a 50 foot radius around ground zero. This spot was way off the regular path, so the odds of someone just showing up to ground zero who was not a geocachers was rare to begin with, but then for them to trash a nice pefect radius around ground zero and not the rest of the park, in this out of the way spot, way off of the path, no, I dont buy it.

 

I wrote to both cache owners. One shut down her cache right away (although I did not ask her to do that, just asked for her to update coordinates and tell people they didn't need to step off the path). The other guy was quite belligerent, and only in time did he finally decide to update the coordinates, but never provided a clue.

 

I actually came across some kids IN THE ACT OF GEOTRASHING.

I was very new to the game and didn't know how to deal with it. Now I would. It was within my first 20 caches or so. I did get them to stop though. I did confirm that they were indeed geocaching. they were teenagers, who had sticks and were tearing all foilage from all the plants in the area. Really beating the place up bad. This one had a clear clue leading right to where the cache was, they just didn't bother to read it. I showed them the cache and they left.

 

Here in the woods I see this kind of thing all the time. The woods will be pristine right until you get to ground zero, even if ground zero is way off the path. Suddenly, there will be a trashed zone in about a 50 ft. radius around ground zero. Happens all the time here.

 

Mainly the problems are the caches without clues. Actually it has been every time except that once with those kids that there has been no clue.

 

I would love to see reviewers be more specific about including clues in sensitive areas. It's really necessary. The people who hide caches in the woods have GPS's that are bouncing around because of the trees, then the finders are having the same problem. Once I had about a 150 foot radius to search. There are hundreds of possible hiding places in the woods in a space that large.

 

SO often we've had to put our GPS's away and just go by the clue in the woods. If there is no clue it can get nuts. That's where we see the trashing.

 

You guys may question, but it is happening out there, and it is, and will continue to get geocaching thrown out of parks.

 

The first cache I placed had a similar destruction at GZ. I complained in the forums about the lack of respect by "some" geocachers and was promptly informed that it was my fault the area was damaged. Even though the cache description clearly said the cache was 3 feet off the trail, the damage was about a 30 foot radius.

 

The cache has been relocated and a nice healthy geotrail goes directly to the cache.

 

The dismissal of the damage by a couple of posters is part of why geocaching could get a bad name. The "in a month or so the area will be fine" is absolutely the wrong attitude to post because somewhere there may be an official who reads that and believes that it's a common attitude of geocachers. It's not my attitude, thats for sure.

 

Personally, I don't know what I would do if I ran across some geovandals. I would be tempted to send their GPSr for a swim but know that could likely turn them into cache maggots and that wouldn't be good. I think I would deny my gut instinct and just politely inform them of the guidelines of hunting and then move on.

 

We can't control the destructive nature of some people. If they don't destroy the area around our cache, it will be the area around someone elses cache. It's unfortunate but their are fools everywhere. Though I believe most cachers are conscious of the environment, there are some who simply would never care.

[+Sol seaker]

Trashed is Not trampled. Trampled is when some plants are squashed by people walking around.

Trashed is when a whole area has had the green folage ripped from the plants.

 

If I am overstating my complaint, how many cache areas do I have to see trashed before I complain?

What percentage of the caches I've found are enough to complain about?

 

Sure it will grow back. But some of the areas I've seen will take a couple of years to grow back.

There's a Time/ Life book on the Grand Canyon that calls the Dam on the Colorado River a temporary thing. Nature will take it down in time too. I sure hate looking at it in the meantime.

 

So it is ok to leave trash in the woods because it will degrade eventually?

 

I agree it's not the right attitude. (thanks for saying it, Bittsen). Saying its OK to trash the environment because it will grow back will not give us great gains in park relations. This is exactly why so many parks do not allow caches.

 

No State park here allows a cache without a permit, and it takes a long time to get one, and a huge process, INCLUDING proving your cache will Not trash the environment.

 

That's like ORV's saying, oh it will grow back. So do we want to look at the mess in the meantime?

 

Do we want our game to be known for doing this?

What kind of reputation do we want?

What legacy do we want our game to leave?

 

The way we can avoid this is simple.

 

1. put your cache within reach of the trail, and say that on the cache page

 

2. if it doesn't work to put it right on the trail (heavy use for instance that would cause it to be muggled), PROVIDE A CLEAR CLUE!!! ("typical northwest hide" works fine for instance. means in a stump)

 

3. Another possibility is to put it on an existing social trail that people will think is the geotrail (I used this one. along with the clear clue I left, the woods in the park around my cache are still in the shape I found them in when I placed the cache).

 

4. Check the coordinates with more than one GPS, and take the coordinates more than once.

 

5. Provide a clear clue (did I mention that?)

 

6. If you want to hide an evil micro, do it in the city.

 

Responsible caching is a good thing. Leave the area in good shape for others to enjoy.

 

There already is a group of people against caching in the eastern US. They are going online to find the cache coordinates and then going and stealing the caches.

 

We need to let them know they are wrong about caching. They need to know we are responsible.

Edited September 5, 2009 by Sol seaker

[Clan Riffster]

I was promptly informed that it was my fault the area was damaged.

That's because us Platinum Members have a few more rules than the regular Premium guys & gals.

On page 2, paragraph 7, subsection B it states "Always blame bittsen".

Sorry, but rules are rules...

[+atmospherium]

I haven't seen any trashed areas in my short caching career, but I've seen places that have been altered permanently due to caching activity. This bothers me.

 

I can't find an exact quote, but I agree with Dave Ulmer (remember him?) about the impact geocaching can have: "...He is an avid proponent of caches with an expiration date to prevent ecological damage to sensitive areas..."

 

I would like to see caches voluntarily archived after 3 or 4 years in sensitive areas. Nature does a very good job of healing itself, but I would rather not inflict any wounds in the first place.

 

I'm thinking of a local cache on a rock-strewn hillside. Every cache seeker brings down more rocks. Granted, it would take a long while for human activity to turn that place into a hill of mud with a pile of rocks at the bottom, but it would take a much longer time for natural forces to move those rocks back up the hill where they were. I would prefer to move the cache than the hill.

[+bittsen]

I haven't seen any trashed areas in my short caching career, but I've seen places that have been altered permanently due to caching activity. This bothers me.

 

I can't find an exact quote, but I agree with Dave Ulmer (remember him?) about the impact geocaching can have: "...He is an avid proponent of caches with an expiration date to prevent ecological damage to sensitive areas..."

 

I would like to see caches voluntarily archived after 3 or 4 years in sensitive areas. Nature does a very good job of healing itself, but I would rather not inflict any wounds in the first place.

 

I'm thinking of a local cache on a rock-strewn hillside. Every cache seeker brings down more rocks. Granted, it would take a long while for human activity to turn that place into a hill of mud with a pile of rocks at the bottom, but it would take a much longer time for natural forces to move those rocks back up the hill where they were. I would prefer to move the cache than the hill.

 

Human activity is part of nature. Sad but true.

Would we stop deer from destroying the same hillside? Not a chance....

[+Sol seaker]

 

Human activity is part of nature. Sad but true.

Would we stop deer from destroying the same hillside? Not a chance....

 

But if they started eating (and demolished) your garden I'll bet you'd stop the deer in a second.

 

You shouldn't distroy their home anymore than they should distroy yours.

[+bittsen]

But if they started eating (and demolished) your garden I'll bet you'd stop the deer in a second.

 

 

Yeah, and eat well for a while too....

[+humboldt flier]

But if they started eating (and demolished) your garden I'll bet you'd stop the deer in a second.

 

 

Yeah, and eat well for a while too....

Hi from N.W. Calif. Caching in sensitive areas has an impact and we might get un-invited to play in some areas if we thrash an area. >>> There is a cacher in the area who when he hides a cache in a sensitive area he flags the specific locale with a cammo'ed surveyors type tape and so indicates on the cache page. Pretty slick solution. But for he and I it is about Geo Finding and not about Geo Torture.

Edited September 6, 2009 by humboldt flier

[AZcachemeister]

I have seen some areas 'obviously disturbed' by geocachers.

 

While many of us understand the value of leaving a site pretty-much the way we found it, not everyone who picks up a GPSr will care...they just want the smilie.

 

Certainly there is no doubt that deer, bear, elk, and other large mammals can do 'natural' damage to a location, but the point is that if the land manager can tie the damage to the existence of a Geocache, there will soon not be a Geocache there...or anywhere else nearby for a long time.

 

 

Hi from N.W. Calif. Caching in sensitive areas has an impact and we might get un-invited to play in some areas if we thrash an area. >>> There is a cacher in the area who when he hides a cache in a sensitive area he flags the specific locale with a cammo'ed surveyors type tape and so indicates on the cache page. Pretty slick solution. But for he and I it is about Geo Finding and not about Geo Torture.

 

This does sound like a good idea, but what about when the tape eventually deteriorates and falls off? What if I can't see the tape and my GPS is pointing thirty feet away?

 

NOTHING beats a meaningful hint that allows the find to be made. If cachers want to deprive themselves by using the hint, that is their choice.

[+mfamilee]

Certainly there is no doubt that deer, bear, elk, and other large mammals can do 'natural' damage to a location.....

Let's not leave out extreme weather... tornadoes, hurricanes, blizzards, etc...

[Clan Riffster]

And psychic, mutant Ninja zombies...