Jump to content

Leave No Trace


Recommended Posts

It is incumbent upon all of us to reduce the chance of doing damage.

 

I don't think that careless or abusive cachers do a lot of damage while hiding or hunting caches but the subject comes up enough to prove that it does in fact happen, and though I believe it rarely happens in the overall scheme of things, any damage is too much.

 

With that thought I will suggest a few things...

 

The first is that hiders are often as responsible as seekers when damage occurs.

 

Hiders should think about how cachers will approach and search for the cache. Don't assume that others think like you or know what you know... just because you have an approach in mind doesn't mean that other cachers will approach it the way you think. Cachers can come a it from 360° so think about any approaches that might not be good and perhaps mention not coming a bad way in the cache description... "Do not park at the school and bushwhack to this cache" or something like that. Parking or Trail-head coordinates are good ways to tell cachers which approach is best.

 

Remember that common sense is not common. It may be a no-brainer to you that a cache hidden among the roots of a tree does not require someone to rake away all the leaves in a 10' circle around the tree but believe me, some cat who can't find the cache in two minutes may get frustrated and do just that. In the forest that's not such a problem, but in urban landscaping it can be a very big deal. Think about what damage not-so-bright cachers might do to find your cache and if it seems at all likely that they will damage something then hide the cache somewhere else. It's seems a shame that hiders must consider the lowest common denominator and account for them in our hiding techniques, but in fact we must.

 

On the other hand as a cacher consider the site. If you are faced with a bramble patch or mud hole the chances are high that there is another way in. Hiders have to get to their cache to maintain it and more often than not they are going to find the easiest way to get there. If the going looks tough, there's probably a path you haven't found!

 

The same applies once you reach ground zero. Stop, look around, and think about how and where the hider likely hid the cache. Most likely he does not want you raking the area or taking things apart to find the cache, so look for hiding places that don't require that.

 

If cachers slow down and think, and assume that no damage need be done to find the cache, then this issue will remain minimal.

 

By "remain" minimal I mean just that... this simply isn't a common issue. I'm certainly no expert, but in 7 years and a few thousand finds in 28 states I have seen damage done at probably less than 15 sites. Our AGA forum has over 1000 Alabama geocachers on board and we rarely if ever hear of cachers destroying things while searching. The topic comes up in these forums every now and then but this is a worldwide forum... as a whole of geocaching the few times it comes up here makes it obvious that while it does happen it does not happen often.

 

Really... at least in my experience it is just not common for cachers to tear things up while looking for a cache, no matter how challenging the hide.

 

Still, it should not happen at all. As a hider consider the 'wrong' ways seekers might try, and hide your cache in a way to avoid or reduce the risk that they will do damage while hunting it. As a seeker don't tear up and break things. Period. Be patient. Think creatively. If the cache is very well hidden then you are FAR more likely to find it by standing still and examining the area carefully than you are by ripping the place apart.

Link to comment

It is incumbent upon all of us to reduce the chance of doing damage.

 

I don't think that careless or abusive cachers do a lot of damage while hiding or hunting caches but the subject comes up enough to prove that it does in fact happen, and though I believe it rarely happens in the overall scheme of things, any damage is too much.

 

With that thought I will suggest a few things...

 

The first is that hiders are often as responsible as seekers when damage occurs.

 

Hiders should think about how cachers will approach and search for the cache. Don't assume that others think like you or know what you know... just because you have an approach in mind doesn't mean that other cachers will approach it the way you think. Cachers can come a it from 360° so think about any approaches that might not be good and perhaps mention not coming a bad way in the cache description... "Do not park at the school and bushwhack to this cache" or something like that. Parking or Trail-head coordinates are good ways to tell cachers which approach is best.

 

Remember that common sense is not common. It may be a no-brainer to you that a cache hidden among the roots of a tree does not require someone to rake away all the leaves in a 10' circle around the tree but believe me, some cat who can't find the cache in two minutes may get frustrated and do just that. In the forest that's not such a problem, but in urban landscaping it can be a very big deal. Think about what damage not-so-bright cachers might do to find your cache and if it seems at all likely that they will damage something then hide the cache somewhere else. It's seems a shame that hiders must consider the lowest common denominator and account for them in our hiding techniques, but in fact we must.

 

On the other hand as a cacher consider the site. If you are faced with a bramble patch or mud hole the chances are high that there is another way in. Hiders have to get to their cache to maintain it and more often than not they are going to find the easiest way to get there. If the going looks tough, there's probably a path you haven't found!

 

The same applies once you reach ground zero. Stop, look around, and think about how and where the hider likely hid the cache. Most likely he does not want you raking the area or taking things apart to find the cache, so look for hiding places that don't require that.

 

If cachers slow down and think, and assume that no damage need be done to find the cache, then this issue will remain minimal.

 

By "remain" minimal I mean just that... this simply isn't a common issue. I'm certainly no expert, but in 7 years and a few thousand finds in 28 states I have seen damage done at probably less than 15 sites. Our AGA forum has over 1000 Alabama geocachers on board and we rarely if ever hear of cachers destroying things while searching. The topic comes up in these forums every now and then but this is a worldwide forum... as a whole of geocaching the few times it comes up here makes it obvious that while it does happen it does not happen often.

 

Really... at least in my experience it is just not common for cachers to tear things up while looking for a cache, no matter how challenging the hide.

 

Still, it should not happen at all. As a hider consider the 'wrong' ways seekers might try, and hide your cache in a way to avoid or reduce the risk that they will do damage while hunting it. As a seeker don't tear up and break things. Period. Be patient. Think creatively. If the cache is very well hidden then you are FAR more likely to find it by standing still and examining the area carefully than you are by ripping the place apart.

AMEN Brother, AMEN

I have been trying to preach this for a while, got involved with LNT even. Its really sad to see fellow cachers destroy our playground.

Link to comment
It may be a no-brainer to you that a cache hidden among the roots of a tree does not require someone to rake away all the leaves in a 10' circle around the tree but believe me, some cat who can't find the cache in two minutes may get frustrated and do just that. In the forest that's not such a problem

If you don't mind my responding to just that one small portion of your posting, while I am in total agreement that raking the leaves from the base of the tree in the woods won't be much of an environmental problem**, it does have a large visual and aesthetic effect on the next people to come along.

 

** Even that may have an effect on the frost level, which could affect underbrush growth, but I'm of the school of thought that we can't walk on the grass without killing a few ants.

Link to comment

You just can't expect a cache owner to account for the actions of all the stupid people out there. This is a clear attempt to take the responsibility off of the seeker and place it on the cache owner. Ultimately, it will lead to stupid warnings for the sake of being stupid.

 

But if you are inviting people to come to a particular location, you should take into account what might happen. I have seen hides under trees, in rocky areas, with the clue "next to rock" and very soft coordinates. It was not surprising that the area ended up getting torn apart, branches of trees broken, rocks overturned. If I were a land manager, it might make me believe that caching has an impact upon an area.

Link to comment
By "remain" minimal I mean just that... this simply isn't a common issue. I'm certainly no expert, but in 7 years and a few thousand finds in 28 states I have seen damage done at probably less than 15 sites. Our AGA forum has over 1000 Alabama geocachers on board and we rarely if ever hear of cachers destroying things while searching. The topic comes up in these forums every now and then but this is a worldwide forum... as a whole of geocaching the few times it comes up here makes it obvious that while it does happen it does not happen often.

 

That's been my experience. I've rarely seen damage, and when I have it was generally limited to a few overturned boulders, broken branches, rotting stumps pulled apart and bent blades of grass. The same kind of stuff that you see when a bear has been looking for grubs or deer have been rooting around for acorns.

 

I can probably count the caches where I saw what could be called severe damage (meaning compacted treadways and swaths devoid of vegetation) on one hand and every one was within 20 feet or so of a road or parking lot. Hardly "sensitive areas".

 

That said, it would be nice if it never happened

Link to comment

Agreed - I too believe it to be very rare that cachers have done anything that could be considered remotely severe. In nearly every case I could hold the hider as responsible as the seekers. Some placements just should never have been - or had such poor writeups that damage became nearly a given.

 

Most "damage" that I have seen could be considered to be seasonal at worst.

Link to comment

This is great information to consider when placing a hide.

 

But, I'd say we need a term other than Leave No Trace. I realize that's a commonly used phrase, but integral to our hobby is finding a trace (a geocache) left in the wild by a fellow cacher.

 

Granted, I'm only vaguely familiar with lnt, so maybe this isn't a valid concern.

Edited by rob3k
Link to comment

This is great information to consider when placing a hide.

 

But, I'd say we need a term other than Leave No Trace. I realize that's a commonly used phrase, but integral to our hobby is finding a trace (a geocache) left in the wild by a fellow cacher.

 

Granted, I'm only vaguely familiar with lnt, so maybe this isn't a valid concern.

Leave No Trace is the trademarked name of an organization. As with the name XEROX Corporation, which became the common term for copying machines regardless of brand (we xerox things on IBM copiers) however, 'Leave no trace' has become the common vernacular for an ethos of leaving the world as you found it.

 

I try to practice and promote basic 'Leave no trace' principles while geocaching, by which I mean don't damage an area while hiding or hunting a cache, but do not belong to nor support the rather extreme green political agenda of the Leave No Trace organization.

 

See the difference? :blink:

Edited by TheAlabamaRambler
Link to comment

But, I'd say we need a term other than Leave No Trace. I realize that's a commonly used phrase, but integral to our hobby is finding a trace (a geocache) left in the wild by a fellow cacher.

 

Geocachers should following the guideline of "Leave no visible trace". (Or if you want to get specific:- Leave no trace that is visible to the general public). As you point out, leaving a cache does not follow the strict principle of "Leave no trace" that is recommended by environmental groups.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...