EarthCache Categories have vanished?

[Narnian Rockhound]

Ok, so I just discovered this evening that the categories for EarthCaches have been removed from the listings at the EarthCache.org website. I'm confused by this, and will be sorely disappointed if they do not return. Can anyone shed some light on what's going on?? I haven't seen this topic here in the forum, but I suppose it is possible I missed some announcement. There are several EC challenge caches out there based on finding one EC for each category, and I was 2 caches away from completing the darn thing. I do hope they come back.

[+Team Eccentric]

Ok, so I just discovered this evening that the categories for EarthCaches have been removed from the listings at the EarthCache.org website. I'm confused by this, and will be sorely disappointed if they do not return. Can anyone shed some light on what's going on?? I haven't seen this topic here in the forum, but I suppose it is possible I missed some announcement. There are several EC challenge caches out there based on finding one EC for each category, and I was 2 caches away from completing the darn thing. I do hope they come back.

Did you send them an email, per chance?

[Narnian Rockhound]

Did you send them an email, per chance?

 

Send who an email?

[+narcissa]

This is just a wild guess, but perhaps this is related to their quest to turn down Earthcaches that are, in their estimation, overdone. I have heard complaints about Earthcaches waterfalls, erratic rocks, and watershed divisions being rejected because there are so many already out there. I'm not sure how much this is actually happening, but if they're eliminating categories it may be because the categories were contributing to this.

[+Touchstone]

Did you send them an email, per chance?

 

Send who an email?

 

From the GSA Website:

 

If you need to contact the EarthCache team about a specific EarthCache issue, please click on this email link. We will respond to your request as soon as possible.If you are asking about a specific EarthCache listing, please use the GC code in the subject line of your email.

 

The email link states the contact address is: glewis-at-geosociety.org

Edited January 14, 2011 by Touchstone

[+Touchstone]

This is just a wild guess, but perhaps this is related to their quest to turn down Earthcaches that are, in their estimation, overdone. I have heard complaints about Earthcaches waterfalls, erratic rocks, and watershed divisions being rejected because there are so many already out there. I'm not sure how much this is actually happening, but if they're eliminating categories it may be because the categories were contributing to this.

 

Not speaking to the veracity of narcissa's assertions, but here's some general information on the subject:

 

Limiting Some Earthcache Types

Edited January 14, 2011 by Touchstone

[+Team Eccentric]

Did you send them an email, per chance?

 

Send who an email?

Buried on the Earthcache.org homepage at the bottom is a sentence "If you need to contact the EarthCache team about a specific EarthCache issue, please click on this email link." where "this email link" is a link to an email. I figured if they were not the correct person to tell, they could refer me to whomever was. Since I already knew where the link was, I went ahead and emailed the link, only Gary was out of office, so I emailed the person listed in his Out of office reply. Who knows what will happen, but I tried. If I find anything out, I'll post here.

[+Team Eccentric]

This is just a wild guess, but perhaps this is related to their quest to turn down Earthcaches that are, in their estimation, overdone. I have heard complaints about Earthcaches waterfalls, erratic rocks, and watershed divisions being rejected because there are so many already out there. I'm not sure how much this is actually happening, but if they're eliminating categories it may be because the categories were contributing to this.

If you eliminate categories, then how could you say that there are too many of one category? That would mean that it would not be possible to have a category that was "overdone". Logic dictates that removing categories would not be in the best interest of an entity trying to limit EarthCaches based on category.

 

*TOTAL CONJECTURE ALERT ON* The only way this would work would be if they changed the terminology...remove Category and make it something else.... (me thinking out loud)*TOTAL CONJECTURE ALERT OFF*

[+narcissa]

This is just a wild guess, but perhaps this is related to their quest to turn down Earthcaches that are, in their estimation, overdone. I have heard complaints about Earthcaches waterfalls, erratic rocks, and watershed divisions being rejected because there are so many already out there. I'm not sure how much this is actually happening, but if they're eliminating categories it may be because the categories were contributing to this.

If you eliminate categories, then how could you say that there are too many of one category? That would mean that it would not be possible to have a category that was "overdone". Logic dictates that removing categories would not be in the best interest of an entity trying to limit EarthCaches based on category.

 

*TOTAL CONJECTURE ALERT ON* The only way this would work would be if they changed the terminology...remove Category and make it something else.... (me thinking out loud)*TOTAL CONJECTURE ALERT OFF*

 

I was kind of thinking that if someone's Earthcache was rejected over an issue like this, they could come back with "...but there's a whole category dedicated to this" or whatever. But I really don't know.

 

Maybe aliens hacked the site and deleted the categories just out of pure mischief.

[+geoaware]

Folks

 

The field still exisits and we are working on ways it can be populated using the new system.

 

There was a big push by people in these forums and elsewhere to have the system of submitting EarthCaches return to the gc.com process and we managed to do that. However, part of that process is that we no longer have a way for people to select a category...and so that data is no longer captured. The only way we can do that is for someone to go read every one of the existing EarthCaches (well over 10,000) and classify them...and we do not have the human power to do that!

 

We are looking at options...one being to abandon the category type (but not one we want to do).

 

Gary

Geoaware

[+junglehair]

I haven't seen an EarthCache Category challenge cache. I don't think we have one in our area. Could you provide a link with an example? I like this idea.

 

Even though there may not be official categories any more, you could likely manage by showing that you've found an exmaple of an EarthCache that would have fit into whichever categories you are missing. If I was the owner of the challenge cache, I would certainly accept that.

[+Konnarock Kid & Marge]

I haven't seen an EarthCache Category challenge cache. I don't think we have one in our area. Could you provide a link with an example? I like this idea.

 

Even though there may not be official categories any more, you could likely manage by showing that you've found an exmaple of an EarthCache that would have fit into whichever categories you are missing. If I was the owner of the challenge cache, I would certainly accept that.

 

Here is a link to one of the EC challenge caches. There may be more, but this is the only one we are aware of.

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=15cafdaa-428a-4e87-9fda-01fc3284f303

 

Good luck.

[+junglehair]

I haven't seen an EarthCache Category challenge cache. I don't think we have one in our area. Could you provide a link with an example? I like this idea.

 

Even though there may not be official categories any more, you could likely manage by showing that you've found an exmaple of an EarthCache that would have fit into whichever categories you are missing. If I was the owner of the challenge cache, I would certainly accept that.

 

Here is a link to one of the EC challenge caches. There may be more, but this is the only one we are aware of.

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=15cafdaa-428a-4e87-9fda-01fc3284f303

 

Good luck.

 

Thanks KKM. I may have to put out my own version of an EarthCache Challenge cache here in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada as I don't believe there is one like that around here.

 

JH

[+Konnarock Kid & Marge]

I haven't seen an EarthCache Category challenge cache. I don't think we have one in our area. Could you provide a link with an example? I like this idea.

 

Even though there may not be official categories any more, you could likely manage by showing that you've found an exmaple of an EarthCache that would have fit into whichever categories you are missing. If I was the owner of the challenge cache, I would certainly accept that.

 

Here is a link to one of the EC challenge caches. There may be more, but this is the only one we are aware of.

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=15cafdaa-428a-4e87-9fda-01fc3284f303

 

Good luck.

 

Thanks KKM. I may have to put out my own version of an EarthCache Challenge cache here in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada as I don't believe there is one like that around here.

 

JH

You are welcome.

You ought to do it! I would like to do the same for our neck of the woods. Texas is also a bit far for us.

I think we are either close or at the required finds, but getting there is the present difficulty.

[+8Nuts MotherGoose]

I haven't seen an EarthCache Category challenge cache. I don't think we have one in our area. Could you provide a link with an example? I like this idea.

 

Even though there may not be official categories any more, you could likely manage by showing that you've found an exmaple of an EarthCache that would have fit into whichever categories you are missing. If I was the owner of the challenge cache, I would certainly accept that.

 

Here is a link to one of the EC challenge caches. There may be more, but this is the only one we are aware of.

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=15cafdaa-428a-4e87-9fda-01fc3284f303

 

Good luck.

 

Thanks KKM. I may have to put out my own version of an EarthCache Challenge cache here in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada as I don't believe there is one like that around here.

 

JH

You are welcome.

You ought to do it! I would like to do the same for our neck of the woods. Texas is also a bit far for us.

I think we are either close or at the required finds, but getting there is the present difficulty.

 

There is also an Earthcache Challenge in Chicago - GC24G20 and in Oregon - GC2J533

[+Lostby7]

I have one as well...though not as difficult of a challenge. Mine is based on Tic-Tac-Toe.

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=a24fd973-6584-4aec-86c7-b65b5d989328

[+Team Eccentric]

I have one as well...though not as difficult of a challenge. Mine is based on Tic-Tac-Toe.

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=a24fd973-6584-4aec-86c7-b65b5d989328

I like that. It is a shame that there is no way around having to visit your actual cache once someone has completed the challenge, but I guess people are supposed to find those items in the same area as the cache location. for me.

[+Team Eccentric]

Folks

 

The field still exisits and we are working on ways it can be populated using the new system.

 

There was a big push by people in these forums and elsewhere to have the system of submitting EarthCaches return to the gc.com process and we managed to do that. However, part of that process is that we no longer have a way for people to select a category...and so that data is no longer captured. The only way we can do that is for someone to go read every one of the existing EarthCaches (well over 10,000) and classify them...and we do not have the human power to do that!

 

We are looking at options...one being to abandon the category type (but not one we want to do).

 

Gary

Geoaware

Is this information still available in a previous database (maybe a back up somewhere?) If the old classification is still available, it would make it much easier to get the GC.com caches updated, even if it was in the description or title (as in VOL-Hawaii Volcanoes N.P-Calder and Crater or SPR-Thermal Spring) or some such thing. I've updated databases this way, and while not the best choice, sometimes it's better than creating a new table column, sometimes not.

 

Just a suggestion.

[+Ambrosia]

I haven't seen an EarthCache Category challenge cache. I don't think we have one in our area. Could you provide a link with an example? I like this idea.

 

Even though there may not be official categories any more, you could likely manage by showing that you've found an exmaple of an EarthCache that would have fit into whichever categories you are missing. If I was the owner of the challenge cache, I would certainly accept that.

Washington has a specific sort of Earthcache challenge: Washington Rockhound Challenge

[+Konnarock Kid & Marge]

I have one as well...though not as difficult of a challenge. Mine is based on Tic-Tac-Toe.

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=a24fd973-6584-4aec-86c7-b65b5d989328

We just looked at it. What a fun cache! I think we could list them all. We wish we were closer! It looks like it is about 150 miles from Marge's sister who lives in Sturgeon Bay. Maybe next trip to see her? I think we could list them all. Are there honorary finds? lol

[+Lostby7]

I have one as well...though not as difficult of a challenge. Mine is based on Tic-Tac-Toe.

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=a24fd973-6584-4aec-86c7-b65b5d989328

We just looked at it. What a fun cache! I think we could list them all. We wish we were closer! It looks like it is about 150 miles from Marge's sister who lives in Sturgeon Bay. Maybe next trip to see her? I think we could list them all. Are there honorary finds? lol

Let's put it like this....I rarely check the paper logs.

 

Another cacher asked to use the format...I think that cache might be in Alaska. When I placed this there were only a few ECs in Wisconsin so the challenge was more challenging...now it's not too hard to get a cross win. The full card is tougher because of the meteor req...there are only three meteor sites in WI and only one is public.

Edited January 14, 2011 by Lostby7

[+geoaware]

Folks

 

The field still exisits and we are working on ways it can be populated using the new system.

 

There was a big push by people in these forums and elsewhere to have the system of submitting EarthCaches return to the gc.com process and we managed to do that. However, part of that process is that we no longer have a way for people to select a category...and so that data is no longer captured. The only way we can do that is for someone to go read every one of the existing EarthCaches (well over 10,000) and classify them...and we do not have the human power to do that!

 

We are looking at options...one being to abandon the category type (but not one we want to do).

 

Gary

Geoaware

Is this information still available in a previous database (maybe a back up somewhere?) If the old classification is still available, it would make it much easier to get the GC.com caches updated, even if it was in the description or title (as in VOL-Hawaii Volcanoes N.P-Calder and Crater or SPR-Thermal Spring) or some such thing. I've updated databases this way, and while not the best choice, sometimes it's better than creating a new table column, sometimes not.

 

Just a suggestion.

 

Its a good suggestion....but we still have 5000 not classiflied...a huge number! Maybe we can get some volunteers (hint, hint) to help?

 

Geoaware

[+Lostby7]

Its a good suggestion....but we still have 5000 not classiflied...a huge number! Maybe we can get some volunteers (hint, hint) to help?

 

Geoaware

Of the 5000 unclassified, are these current submissions? If they are still being tracked then I could see this as a worthy endeavor, otherwise we would be kinda spinning our wheels classifying data on only a portion of the pages...

 

Going through these would be a great way to learn a huge amount about geology!

[+Team Eccentric]

Folks

 

The field still exisits and we are working on ways it can be populated using the new system.

 

There was a big push by people in these forums and elsewhere to have the system of submitting EarthCaches return to the gc.com process and we managed to do that. However, part of that process is that we no longer have a way for people to select a category...and so that data is no longer captured. The only way we can do that is for someone to go read every one of the existing EarthCaches (well over 10,000) and classify them...and we do not have the human power to do that!

 

We are looking at options...one being to abandon the category type (but not one we want to do).

 

Gary

Geoaware

Is this information still available in a previous database (maybe a back up somewhere?) If the old classification is still available, it would make it much easier to get the GC.com caches updated, even if it was in the description or title (as in VOL-Hawaii Volcanoes N.P-Calder and Crater or SPR-Thermal Spring) or some such thing. I've updated databases this way, and while not the best choice, sometimes it's better than creating a new table column, sometimes not.

 

Just a suggestion.

 

Its a good suggestion....but we still have 5000 not classiflied...a huge number! Maybe we can get some volunteers (hint, hint) to help?

 

Geoaware

I'd be willing to help, but I couldn't guarantee I'd get the classifications right. If someone could add a column to the database and a dropdown field to the site for new cache entry, that would fix things going forward.

[+junglehair]

I'd be willing to help, but I couldn't guarantee I'd get the classifications right. If someone could add a column to the database and a dropdown field to the site for new cache entry, that would fix things going forward.

 

I don't imagine it would be as easy as that. Remember the listings are now submitted through geocaching.com, so it is the same template that is used for regular geocaches. What would you populate the "EarthCache Classification" field with on a traditional cache? Sure, it could be N/A, but then every geocache that get's submitted would need to select that. It could cause great confusion for a newbie wondering what EarthCache classification they need to put for that piece of tupperware they just placed in the park next door.

[+Team Eccentric]

I'd be willing to help, but I couldn't guarantee I'd get the classifications right. If someone could add a column to the database and a dropdown field to the site for new cache entry, that would fix things going forward.

 

I don't imagine it would be as easy as that. Remember the listings are now submitted through geocaching.com, so it is the same template that is used for regular geocaches. What would you populate the "EarthCache Classification" field with on a traditional cache? Sure, it could be N/A, but then every geocache that get's submitted would need to select that. It could cause great confusion for a newbie wondering what EarthCache classification they need to put for that piece of tupperware they just placed in the park next door.

Really? You don't think a dropdown with a line of "Classification: For EarthCaches only" would work? In the real world, you would pick the type of cache, then the page would refresh and Classification dropdown would appear only if you chose something that needed a classification, but that takes some "if...then" code work. I was thinking that if a blank or None were available in the dropdown, it just stayed as nothing for default. Sure some people could make a mistake, but wouldn't the reviewer catch it?

 

It's a thought. (Maybe not the right one, but at least one....)

[+narcissa]

This issue could go well with the larger argument for tags on geocaches. If we could tag geocaches, Earthcaches could be tagged with the appropriate classification.

[+drew8]

As the owner of the EarthCache Challenge in Texas, I really hope we figure out a way to retain classifications. Plus I was thinking that we could have souvenirs for each classification to earn.

[+Konnarock Kid & Marge]

Folks

 

The field still exisits and we are working on ways it can be populated using the new system.

 

There was a big push by people in these forums and elsewhere to have the system of submitting EarthCaches return to the gc.com process and we managed to do that. However, part of that process is that we no longer have a way for people to select a category...and so that data is no longer captured. The only way we can do that is for someone to go read every one of the existing EarthCaches (well over 10,000) and classify them...and we do not have the human power to do that!

 

We are looking at options...one being to abandon the category type (but not one we want to do).

 

Gary

Geoaware

Is this information still available in a previous database (maybe a back up somewhere?) If the old classification is still available, it would make it much easier to get the GC.com caches updated, even if it was in the description or title (as in VOL-Hawaii Volcanoes N.P-Calder and Crater or SPR-Thermal Spring) or some such thing. I've updated databases this way, and while not the best choice, sometimes it's better than creating a new table column, sometimes not.

 

Just a suggestion.

 

Its a good suggestion....but we still have 5000 not classiflied...a huge number! Maybe we can get some volunteers (hint, hint) to help?

 

Geoaware

As you know, I am far from being a geologist, but I think I know enough to help and will do so. Thanks.

Edited January 15, 2011 by Konnarock Kid & Marge

[+geoaware]

The classification will only exist on the listings on earthcache.org....and that is where the work will need to be done.

 

Thanks for the offers....I will work on a system to try and get things moving.

[+TeacherMike]

The classification will only exist on the listings on earthcache.org....and that is where the work will need to be done.

 

Thanks for the offers....I will work on a system to try and get things moving.

 

I too would love to help out if needed to help classify the needed ECs. I think the whole idea of the classifications and the challanges has raised the awareness of the classifications and has lead to some better ECs being put out or at least in my area. This is the main reason I placed my challange, the one in the Chicago area.

[Narnian Rockhound]

I haven't seen an EarthCache Category challenge cache. I don't think we have one in our area. Could you provide a link with an example? I like this idea.

 

There are a number of challenge caches out there related to ECs, some are related to the total number found, others to the category of cache found.

 

Folks have already posted these, which are all category related:

Houston (GC1Z4PZ)

Washington (GC1WY05)

Oregon (GC2J533; premium members only)

near Chicago (GC24G20)

Wisconsin (the tic tac toe one near Milwaukee, GC1A1Q8).

 

These are also out there, which are related to total # EC finds, not categories:

Indianapolis (GC1A8GC, combines ECs w/ virtuals)

a bunch in Ann Arbor, MI (starting with GC2AM0Y & going up in the number of finds up to 500, which no one has yet found; you can see all of them on the map view as they are all close by one another)

[Narnian Rockhound]

Folks

 

The field still exisits and we are working on ways it can be populated using the new system.

 

There was a big push by people in these forums and elsewhere to have the system of submitting EarthCaches return to the gc.com process and we managed to do that. However, part of that process is that we no longer have a way for people to select a category...and so that data is no longer captured. The only way we can do that is for someone to go read every one of the existing EarthCaches (well over 10,000) and classify them...and we do not have the human power to do that!

 

We are looking at options...one being to abandon the category type (but not one we want to do).

 

Gary

Geoaware

Is this information still available in a previous database (maybe a back up somewhere?) If the old classification is still available, it would make it much easier to get the GC.com caches updated, even if it was in the description or title (as in VOL-Hawaii Volcanoes N.P-Calder and Crater or SPR-Thermal Spring) or some such thing. I've updated databases this way, and while not the best choice, sometimes it's better than creating a new table column, sometimes not.

 

Just a suggestion.

 

Its a good suggestion....but we still have 5000 not classiflied...a huge number! Maybe we can get some volunteers (hint, hint) to help?

 

Geoaware

 

I'm happy to help with the EC classifications.

[+TerryDad2]

The classification will only exist on the listings on earthcache.org....and that is where the work will need to be done.

 

Thanks for the offers....I will work on a system to try and get things moving.

Are you still looking for volunteers?

[+The Fossillady]

Folks

 

The field still exisits and we are working on ways it can be populated using the new system.

 

There was a big push by people in these forums and elsewhere to have the system of submitting EarthCaches return to the gc.com process and we managed to do that. However, part of that process is that we no longer have a way for people to select a category...and so that data is no longer captured. The only way we can do that is for someone to go read every one of the existing EarthCaches (well over 10,000) and classify them...and we do not have the human power to do that!

 

We are looking at options...one being to abandon the category type (but not one we want to do).

 

Gary

Geoaware

Is this information still available in a previous database (maybe a back up somewhere?) If the old classification is still available, it would make it much easier to get the GC.com caches updated, even if it was in the description or title (as in VOL-Hawaii Volcanoes N.P-Calder and Crater or SPR-Thermal Spring) or some such thing. I've updated databases this way, and while not the best choice, sometimes it's better than creating a new table column, sometimes not.

 

Just a suggestion.

 

Its a good suggestion....but we still have 5000 not classiflied...a huge number! Maybe we can get some volunteers (hint, hint) to help?

 

Geoaware

 

I'm happy to help with the EC classifications.

 

 

I would love to help with classification. I think I am qualified.

[+Manville Possum]

We lost another listing in our area today that is a type no longer accepted by GSA.http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?wp=GC1EGKB But this one needed to go because the area is no longer safe because of the dope zombies.

[+Konnarock Kid & Marge]

You may be right, but we don't think it was due to the "dope zombies"! We have been there a few times and no dope zombies were in sight. The real danger is due to mother nature. Over the years, there have been a few people who have fallen to their death or severely injured while messing around at the top of the Falls. Most have fallen from the top of the Falls which you have no business going there in the first place and were not required to do so for the earthcache.

There is one short part of the trail that is very narrow (inches) that can be slick and provides a nasty drop. Even though you can get hurt by falling off that part of the trail, we don't believe it has been the source of death. You can even avoid that by going up hill (to the left)at the small falls.

I am not in any way, shape or form criticizing the archiving of the cache because of the dangers involved and after all it is on private property and if the owner says no it means no! We were extremely surprised when the area was opened up in the first place. It has been posted (off limits) off and on for years. When we went for the EC, the area was pristine and no sign of drinking, etc. was found and it was not posted. All in all, it's still sad because the Falls and it's surrounds are beautiful.

Edited June 10, 2011 by Konnarock Kid & Marge

[+Manville Possum]

You may be right, but we don't think it was due to the "dope zombies"! We have been there a few times and no dope zombies were in sight. The real danger is due to mother nature. Over the years, there have been a few people who have fallen to their death or severely injured while messing around at the top of the Falls. Most have fallen from the top of the Falls which you have no business going there in the first place and were not required to do so for the earthcache.

There is one short part of the trail that is very narrow (inches) that can be slick and provides a nasty drop. Even though you can get hurt by falling off that part of the trail, we don't believe it has been the source of death. You can even avoid that by going up hill (to the left)at the small falls.

I am not in any way, shape or form criticizing the archiving of the cache because of the dangers involved and after all it is on private property and if the owner says no it means no! We were extremely surprised when the area was opened up in the first place. It has been posted (off limits) off and on for years. When we went for the EC, the area was pristine and no sign of drinking, etc. was found and it was not posted. All in all, it's still sad because the Falls and it's surrounds are beautiful.

The summer of 1985 a group of us went there to visit the falls. While we were there some of the vehicles were broken into and radios and personal items were stolen. Also a windshield was smashed. I went there last year and there was needles on the ground. Not a place I want to take my family. The cache was archived at the request of the land owner and the advise of local Law enforcement, or so the reviewer states in the archive note.

[+Konnarock Kid & Marge]

The place has always been dangerous from a hiking or climbing standpoint. I am told that there is a new owner who hasn't bothered to post the area (yet?), but want's no trespassers which is his right. As far as local law enforcement is concerned, if called with a trespass violation they will intervene, otherwise, they couldn't care less!

1985? Don't you think that is a little out of date? We have been there a few times within the last year and never, never saw any sign of drug use except for perhaps a used band aid wrapper and no harm came to any of our vehicles.

It boils down to one thing....new owner, new rules although we understand there is some dispute as to who owns what! The only harm we have ever seen to anything is from those dad blame ATVs. Deep ruts and mud holes have resulted from uncaring ATV operators, but thank goodness the problem is far from the Falls unless some joker decides to run his ATV in the stream therefore creating a muddy water flow over the Falls. Please don't blame all ATV riders, dumbness/couldn't care less, is an affliction that ruins a lot of things.

[+Manville Possum]

The place has always been dangerous from a hiking or climbing standpoint. I am told that there is a new owner who hasn't bothered to post the area (yet?), but want's no trespassers which is his right. As far as local law enforcement is concerned, if called with a trespass violation they will intervene, otherwise, they couldn't care less!

1985? Don't you think that is a little out of date? We have been there a few times within the last year and never, never saw any sign of drug use except for perhaps a used band aid wrapper and no harm came to any of our vehicles.

It boils down to one thing....new owner, new rules although we understand there is some dispute as to who owns what! The only harm we have ever seen to anything is from those dad blame ATVs. Deep ruts and mud holes have resulted from uncaring ATV operators, but thank goodness the problem is far from the Falls unless some joker decides to run his ATV in the stream therefore creating a muddy water flow over the Falls. Please don't blame all ATV riders, dumbness/couldn't care less, is an affliction that ruins a lot of things.

Let's just say that I know some of the ATV and drug users in the area and I thought that they were the ones to blame.