Is this Cache Allowed?

October 17, 2009

Last weekend i found a cache where you had to climb a slippery log up 10 feet or so to find a cache inside a tree. Is this allowed? I mean its quite dangerous if you fall or something. What do you guys think?

10.1k · October 17, 2009

Nothing wrong with it, if it has the proper difficulty level. It's up to the cacher to decide if s/he wants to search for it.

3.7k · October 17, 2009

What the dolphin said. I've done several caches like that, and others even more physically risky. There's something for every skill level; that's one thing I like about this activity. Some caches are family-friendly; others are only for the daring.

5.7k · October 17, 2009

Last weekend i found a cache where you had to climb a slippery log up 10 feet or so to find a cache inside a tree. Is this allowed? I mean its quite dangerous if you fall or something. What do you guys think?

Would you please post the GCxxxx number for the cache?

4k · October 17, 2009

Sounds like a cache that i would place! Many people will feel that this is what makes geocaching great.

4.8k · October 17, 2009

Sounds like a cache that i would place! Many people will feel that this is what makes geocaching great.

I would guess that MOST don't.

1.4k · October 17, 2009

Last weekend i found a cache where you had to climb a slippery log up 10 feet or so to find a cache inside a tree. Is this allowed? I mean its quite dangerous if you fall or something. What do you guys think?

I sure would hate to have your username when signing a log sheet.

ScubaSonic

5.3k · October 17, 2009

Sounds like a cache that i would place! Many people will feel that this is what makes geocaching great.
I would guess that MOST don't.

That is just sad. If true, then geocaching has fallen far indeed.

24.7k · October 17, 2009

Last weekend i found a cache where you had to climb a slippery log up 10 feet or so to find a cache inside a tree. Is this allowed? I mean its quite dangerous if you fall or something. What do you guys think?

Today I was trimming my trees. I slipped on a hand truck I was using as a ladder. Using a hand truck as a latter isn't the wisest thing. I beat myself up sliding down the thing. Then landed on the flat plate at the bottom and that flipped it into me like stepping on a rake, further wounding my pride.

You have to know your limits there are a lot of ways to get hurt out there. As for the cache it's fine. It exists like the tree and the handtruck. It takes us doing something stupid to make it dangerous. Know your limits, be safe, and you will be fine.

4.8k · October 17, 2009

Sounds like a cache that i would place! Many people will feel that this is what makes geocaching great.
I would guess that MOST don't.

That is just sad. If true, then geocaching has fallen far indeed.

Really? See if you can understand the thought behind this.

If I want to go find a geocache, i will go out and find a geocache. If I want to climb a tree, I will go climb a tree. If I want to take a 10 mile hike in the desert, i will take a 10 mile hike in the desert.

Now, if I don't want to climb a tree, I won't. Especially if all I want to do is find a geocache.

Geocaching has fallen, indeed. I remember reading about where geocaching was about finding a container, signing the logsheet and possibly trading items. There was no talk of climbing trees in the first mention of geocaching.

24.7k · October 17, 2009

...

I remember reading about where geocaching was about finding a container,...

Exactly. That's the beauty of it. There are all kinds of hiding places. Including up trees where you have to climb a slippery log and wherever you are thinking of when you long wistfully for the ones that aren't hidden up trees.

5.3k · October 17, 2009

There's nothing wrong with placing a cache in a "dangerous" location.

There's also nothing wrong with not finding or not searching for every cache.

4k · October 17, 2009

Sounds like a cache that i would place! Many people will feel that this is what makes geocaching great.

I would guess that MOST don't.

Here are some excerpts from some of the 13 logs from the aforementioned cache. Mine is much higher up and over water.

6/30 What an exciting cache. This is what it is all about. FUN!

7/27 NOW THIS IS WHAT CACHING IS ABOUT!! KUDDOS TO KNIGHT2000!!!!!!!!!!

8/7 Very nicely done. We need more caches like this.

8/22 This was quite an adventure! ... Still, it is quite a remarkable view, and the area itself is beautiful. Take time to walk around the area, its very serene. Best Cache Yet!!

8/29 After bushwacking, climbing the wrong tree, and getting many scrapes and cuts, this cache was definitely worth the find! Great view from the cache.

9/4 Great view from up here. Probably the prettiest I've seen from a cache." ... "That was cool. Good thing my wife didn't see me up there."

October 17, 2009

Now, if I don't want to climb a tree, I won't. Especially if all I want to do is find a geocache.

Geocaching has fallen, indeed. I remember reading about where geocaching was about finding a container, signing the logsheet and possibly trading items. There was no talk of climbing trees in the first mention of geocaching.

And that's the beauty of the terrain ratings. Sounds like you are happy with 2 stars and under... Don't be upset about people enjoying 3-5 star caches!

October 17, 2009

Sounds like a cache that i would place! Many people will feel that this is what makes geocaching great.
I would guess that MOST don't.

That is just sad. If true, then geocaching has fallen far indeed.

Really? See if you can understand the thought behind this.

If I want to go find a geocache, i will go out and find a geocache. If I want to climb a tree, I will go climb a tree. If I want to take a 10 mile hike in the desert, i will take a 10 mile hike in the desert.

Now, if I don't want to climb a tree, I won't. Especially if all I want to do is find a geocache.

Geocaching has fallen, indeed. I remember reading about where geocaching was about finding a container, signing the logsheet and possibly trading items. There was no talk of climbing trees in the first mention of geocaching.

Wow! I certainly do not understand the thought behind that. geocaching has a difficulty rating system, if you cannot handle the difficulty of a particular cache, go out and find one with a lower rating. if you do go out and find one that is "up a tree" or for some other reason you are not comfortable retrieving it then move on to another that works for you. there is certainly no shortage of whatever difficulty rating cache you may want to go after.

2.3k · October 18, 2009

Wow! I certainly do not understand the thought behind that. geocaching has a difficulty rating system, if you cannot handle the difficulty of a particular cache, go out and find one with a lower rating. if you do go out and find one that is "up a tree" or for some other reason you are not comfortable retrieving it then move on to another that works for you. there is certainly no shortage of whatever difficulty rating cache you may want to go after.

I became involved in geocaching in early 2006, after I'd been diagnosed as a diabetic. I was told that the best thing I could do for myself was to get up, get out, and get more exercise. When I read about caching, I realized it gave me the perfect excuse to do just that. If, when I first discovered caching, I had gotten the impression that it consisted of finding tiny containers hidden under lamp post skirts, I would have looked elsewhere for a hobby. I've been on some wonderful long hikes chasing down Tupperware in the woods; it's taken me to beautiful places in my own back yard that I never knew existed. And partly due to the exercise aspect of caching, my diabetes is under excellent control.

There has been a recent trend in my area to hide caches high up in difficult-to-climb trees. Do I go after these? No, unless it's a very easy climb. At 60 years of age, I know my limits. Do I begrudge those hiders who like to place those caches? Absolutely not. I appreciate it when the cache description warns me in advance that a hide might be beyond my capabilities, either in words or at least in the Difficulty/Terrain rating. If a cache is published in my area that I wouldn't feel comfortable going for, I simply put it on my Ignore List. If I trek to a cache site and realize once I've arrived that I can't or don't want to go for it, I simply log my DNF and move on.

That's one of the things that attracted me to this craziness from the beginning: There's room for the entire spectrum of difficulty and terrain; it's your choice as to what brings you enjoyment and fulfillment.

--Larry

8k · October 18, 2009

Sounds like a cache that i would place! Many people will feel that this is what makes geocaching great.
I would guess that MOST don't.

That is just sad. If true, then geocaching has fallen far indeed.

Really? See if you can understand the thought behind this.

If I want to go find a geocache, i will go out and find a geocache. If I want to climb a tree, I will go climb a tree. If I want to take a 10 mile hike in the desert, i will take a 10 mile hike in the desert.

Now, if I don't want to climb a tree, I won't. Especially if all I want to do is find a geocache.

Geocaching has fallen, indeed. I remember reading about where geocaching was about finding a container, signing the logsheet and possibly trading items. There was no talk of climbing trees in the first mention of geocaching.

I disagree with fizzymagic but for another reason. When geoaching began, most of the early adopters were outdoors types. These were people who already had GPS units for hiking, backpacking, hunting, mountain biking, or off-roading. While caches were placed in all different terrains, there was a higher percentage of caches that required hiking some distance and often involved going off trail perhaps involving rock climbing and even tree climbing. The general community expected a certain number of caches would be difficult and perhaps even dangerous to retrieve. Those that didn't feel that they had the physical abilities to do every cache didn't post on the forum that a cache was too dangerous (at least not as often). They understood that type of caching appealed to a significant part of the geocaching community.

As geocaching grew in popularity it began to appeal to a broader demographic: retired people, families with small children, young urban dwellers. These people preferred driving to caches or shorter walks on relatively level ground. Some of the original geocachers began to complain of microSpew to refer to the many micro caches these new cachers hid at urban and suburban sites. Many complained most about the caches hidden in lampposts in parking lots.

In fact the new cachers were hiding the types of caches they wanted to find. While some of these people enjoy challenging hides in urban/suburban settings, others wanted caches that were relatively easy to find and not likely to be muggled. LPCs meet this criteria. Now the new cachers outnumber the old timers. Interestingly there are still many new cachers who discover the joy of hiking in the woods or up the side of a mountain. Those that are physically able, will hide caches in trees or make you climb some large boulders to reach the cache. There is no danger of these caches disappearing. I find more of these now than ever before. With not too much difficultly, I can find interesting urban and suburban caches as well, ones that are physically or mentally challenging or hidden in some cool location. Not every cache is an LPC or one of its equivalents, despite what some would have you believe. But what I see now are new cachers that worry that some challenging cache is too dangerous or that some placement isn't legal. I figure they are just trying to get back at those who say that the cache they prefer are too lame. What may be needed is a better way for each person to find the caches they like and perhaps to avoid the ones they find too lame or too dangerous. I have always found it easy to avoid certain caches. If I get to a location and begin to look and see it involves something I don't feel comfortable doing or that I don't think would be any fun to try, I abort that hunt and go look for another cache. That is what I recommend anyone do when they find a cache they can't or won't do.

3.8k · October 18, 2009

Last weekend i found a cache where you had to climb a slippery log up 10 feet or so to find a cache inside a tree. Is this allowed? I mean its quite dangerous if you fall or something. What do you guys think?

ditto ditto ditto. Some of us crave caches like this.

3.8k · October 18, 2009

Sounds like a cache that i would place! Many people will feel that this is what makes geocaching great.
I would guess that MOST don't.

That is just sad. If true, then geocaching has fallen far indeed.

Really? See if you can understand the thought behind this.

If I want to go find a geocache, i will go out and find a geocache. If I want to climb a tree, I will go climb a tree. If I want to take a 10 mile hike in the desert, i will take a 10 mile hike in the desert.

Now, if I don't want to climb a tree, I won't. Especially if all I want to do is find a geocache.

Geocaching has fallen, indeed. I remember reading about where geocaching was about finding a container, signing the logsheet and possibly trading items. There was no talk of climbing trees in the first mention of geocaching.

Hmm.. I liked the Bittsen from two weeks ago better.

18.9k · October 18, 2009

Just who gets to decide what is "too" dangerous?? The overweight 50 year old with bad knees?? A 6 year old kid? A 24 year old track athlete? The 31 year old avid outdoorsman? Guy with a ladder? 72 year old with a cane? The 21 year old marathon runner? Underwater welder? Or maybe you could just decide that for yourself and walk away when it is too much for you.

6.7k · October 18, 2009

Just who gets to decide what is "too" dangerous?? The overweight 50 year old with bad knees?? A 6 year old kid? A 24 year old track athlete? The 31 year old avid outdoorsman? Guy with a ladder? 72 year old with a cane? The 21 year old marathon runner? Underwater welder? Or maybe you could just decide that for yourself and walk away when it is too much for you.

How dare you imply that a person should be responsible for themselves! :smile:

3.8k · October 18, 2009

Just who gets to decide what is "too" dangerous?? The overweight 50 year old with bad knees?? A 6 year old kid? A 24 year old track athlete? The 31 year old avid outdoorsman? Guy with a ladder? 72 year old with a cane? The 21 year old marathon runner? Underwater welder? Or maybe you could just decide that for yourself and walk away when it is too much for you.

How dare you imply that a person should be responsible for themselves!

LOL.

3.3k · October 18, 2009

Sounds like a cache that i would place! Many people will feel that this is what makes geocaching great.
I would guess that MOST don't.

That is just sad. If true, then geocaching has fallen far indeed.

Really? See if you can understand the thought behind this.

If I want to go find a geocache, i will go out and find a geocache. If I want to climb a tree, I will go climb a tree. If I want to take a 10 mile hike in the desert, i will take a 10 mile hike in the desert.

Now, if I don't want to climb a tree, I won't. Especially if all I want to do is find a geocache.

Geocaching has fallen, indeed. I remember reading about where geocaching was about finding a container, signing the logsheet and possibly trading items. There was no talk of climbing trees in the first mention of geocaching.

I just can't seem to find the words to express how strongly I disagree with this post. It simply makes no sense in any way.

I have been to this cache twice knowing that I would not attempt it. I see nothing wrong with the cache and I admire those who are willing to do what is necessary to retrieve the container and sign the log. To me this cache exemplifies one of the fabulous things about caching. There is something for everyone and we don't have to worry about making sure that every cacher can find every cache.

Do what you enjoy and find caches you like. Don't try to tell anyone else they can't do the same.

1.4k · October 18, 2009

.QUOTE(Knight2000 @ Oct 17 2009, 03:46 PM)

Sounds like a cache that i would place! Many people will feel that this is what makes geocaching great.

I would guess that MOST don't.

It would depend on what you mean by most don't. If you mean most cachers would not seek this one, you may be right. I certainly can't climb a slippery log at my age and physical condition. However, most cachers I know would think this cache was a good idea, and what makes Geocaching great, even if they themselves would have to skip it. :smile:

October 18, 2009

I have a couple in dangerous areas. They are not so dangerous if you are an adult, teenager to older child but i always put not kid friendly.

October 18, 2009

Sounds like a cache that i would place! Many people will feel that this is what makes geocaching great.
I would guess that MOST don't.

That is just sad. If true, then geocaching has fallen far indeed.

Really? See if you can understand the thought behind this.

If I want to go find a geocache, i will go out and find a geocache. If I want to climb a tree, I will go climb a tree. If I want to take a 10 mile hike in the desert, i will take a 10 mile hike in the desert.

Now, if I don't want to climb a tree, I won't. Especially if all I want to do is find a geocache.

Geocaching has fallen, indeed. I remember reading about where geocaching was about finding a container, signing the logsheet and possibly trading items. There was no talk of climbing trees in the first mention of geocaching.

When Geocaching first started it was about burying a pail, filling it with stuff and wondering if anyone would take the time to find it.

I am glad the hobby has evolved into something that offers a variety of caches for a variety of cachers.

October 18, 2009

Just who gets to decide what is "too" dangerous?? The overweight 50 year old with bad knees?? A 6 year old kid? A 24 year old track athlete? The 31 year old avid outdoorsman? Guy with a ladder? 72 year old with a cane? The 21 year old marathon runner? Underwater welder? Or maybe you could just decide that for yourself and walk away when it is too much for you.

Whoa. Hold on there. I am an overweight 50 yr old with bad knees and I enjoy climbing trees, slogging through muck and crawling through brush. Don't be so quick to cast your stereotypes.

Edited October 18, 2009 by Wooden Cyclist

3.7k · October 18, 2009

I have been to this cache twice knowing that I would not attempt it. I see nothing wrong with the cache and I admire those who are willing to do what is necessary to retrieve the container and sign the log. To me this cache exemplifies one of the fabulous things about caching. There is something for everyone and we don't have to worry about making sure that every cacher can find every cache.

I loved that cache! :smile: Its on my Northwest Classics bookmark list!

3.8k · October 18, 2009

Put me in the group of old farts that love to climb trees for a cache, and crawl around in the mud, under a waterfall, in a cave, on a mountain, up a slippery slope, why anything that pushes my envelope a bit.

3.3k · October 18, 2009

I have been to this cache twice knowing that I would not attempt it. I see nothing wrong with the cache and I admire those who are willing to do what is necessary to retrieve the container and sign the log. To me this cache exemplifies one of the fabulous things about caching. There is something for everyone and we don't have to worry about making sure that every cacher can find every cache.

I loved that cache! Its on my Northwest Classics bookmark list!

Well even I would climb "that" high Abby. :lol:

9.3k · October 18, 2009

What do you guys think?

I think you should read the guidelines. I don't recall anything in there even suggesting that all caches must be placed in such a manner as to be safely accessible for all finders, regardless of their intellect, experience and state of health. If you find yourself at a cache that you feel is too dangerous, for you, move on to the next one. :smile:

4.8k · October 18, 2009

I think people got the wrong impression from my post. Since so many saw it that way I must not have been clear.

What I was trying to say is I don't need geocaching to get me up a tree. I don't need geocaching to get me to go for a hike.

For me, those aren't necessarily linked, though they could be.

For the record, I have gotten injured taking pictures. I don't think I would cry if I were injured geocaching.

Dangerous locations, as long as rated properly, good to go! See my post in the off-topic forum for one I would do. (no, not the ice one)

3.7k · October 18, 2009

Well even I would climb "that" high Abby.

Hey, that was on the way UP. :smile: I was the one who retrieved the cache at the top of that 50' crazy-monkey-tripod, in the rain (those rungs were cold and slippery!). Some of my companions refused to take in the view from up there.

6.1k · October 18, 2009

All caches can be dangerous, depending on how you approach them, or how much you've had to drink.

You just have to be creative! :smile:

I've witnessed someone scrape up their car on a LPC, simply because of laziness and a few bees..

Edited October 18, 2009 by 4wheelin_fool

3.3k · October 18, 2009

Well even I would climb "that" high Abby.

Hey, that was on the way UP. I was the one who retrieved the cache at the top of that 50' crazy-monkey-tripod, in the rain (those rungs were cold and slippery!). Some of my companions refused to take in the view from up there.

I hope your companions who wouldn't climb didn't sign. That was my decision. A note was fine.

1.9k · October 18, 2009

Sounds like a cache that i would place! Many people will feel that this is what makes geocaching great.
I would guess that MOST don't.

That is just sad. If true, then geocaching has fallen far indeed.

Really? See if you can understand the thought behind this.

If I want to go find a geocache, i will go out and find a geocache. If I want to climb a tree, I will go climb a tree. If I want to take a 10 mile hike in the desert, i will take a 10 mile hike in the desert.

Now, if I don't want to climb a tree, I won't. Especially if all I want to do is find a geocache.

Geocaching has fallen, indeed. I remember reading about where geocaching was about finding a container, signing the logsheet and possibly trading items. There was no talk of climbing trees in the first mention of geocaching.

I just can't seem to find the words to express how strongly I disagree with this post. It simply makes no sense in any way.

I have been to this cache twice knowing that I would not attempt it. I see nothing wrong with the cache and I admire those who are willing to do what is necessary to retrieve the container and sign the log. To me this cache exemplifies one of the fabulous things about caching. There is something for everyone and we don't have to worry about making sure that every cacher can find every cache.

Do what you enjoy and find caches you like. Don't try to tell anyone else they can't do the same.

I'd do that one in a heartbeat. looks pretty easy for a 5 star T.[hard would be if the ladder wasn't there]

14k · October 18, 2009

Last weekend i found a cache where you had to climb a slippery log up 10 feet or so to find a cache inside a tree. Is this allowed? I mean its quite dangerous if you fall or something. What do you guys think?

As long as you use proper eye protection when using the chain saw to chop up that log it's relatively safe.

6k · October 18, 2009

You think that is dangerous. Probably should set your PQ to reduce the terrain at least if not difficulty. There many caches I have been to that greatly exceed that.

This is not a nanny sport. If at any time you don't feel comfortable, quit the hunt and put it on your ignore list. Some of us thrive on the risky ones.

October 18, 2009

I would love to have this kind of cache in my area. I look forward to when I can get out of the house w/o the kids on a weekend. Speaking of that, I'm so bummed I have no one this weekend to stay with my kids cuz there are two new caches in my area. We're not going to attempt them because the creator mentioned it was a long walk and the difficulty is three stars. Since my youngest are 2 and 4, I won't be taking them but I'd be out there by myself in a heart beat!

8.6k · October 18, 2009

Just to put the 10ft slippery log into caching context, the OP might like to have a look at this cache listing, particularly the Gallery pics...

"The tallest tree in the forest."

MrsB

1.7k · October 18, 2009

Danger? Nope, it is only dangerous to those with to much self confidence and zero preparation.

There are many ways accessing said cache could be rendered safer. Crampons, tree spurs, rope etc etc.

Is this Cache Allowed?

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Join the conversation