Ever hesitate to post a recovery?

[TillaMurphs]

Sometimes when I find a very old or rare or fragile benchmark I am wary of adding the recovery to Geocaching, or maybe even the NGS, for fear that the wrong sort of person could use the information to find and then abscond with the mark.

I have never actually not posted a recovery for this reason, but on extremely important recoveries once or twice I have left out a tad bit of info that might have made recovery a bit easier.

 

I just wondered if I am the only one who worries about this? Our recovery notes could be a great roadmap for nefarious evildoers to follow to steal disks, etc if they were so inclined.

 

Paranoidally yours,

 

One member of the TillaMurphs

[+dukeofurl01]

I've never hesitated. They're meant to be found, if not by us, by some surveyor that needs to use it. They're secured pretty well...

[kayakbird]

Sometimes when I find a very old or rare or fragile benchmark I am wary...

 

Paranoidally yours,

 

One member of the TillaMurphs

 

There are a couple of Special Publication #18 marks (USBM, chiseled square, stone posts) with PID's that are disturbed and out of position that I have neither GC logged or NGS recovered. Both have other marks of that era or newer within a reasonable distance for a professional to use. Maybe somebody else following those early strings will get the same enjoyment I did from a successful hunt. Also have located two NONPIDS's from SP PUB #18 in Gallatin County, Montana.

 

I did not log or recover anything from my 1 for 15 trip after IBC offsets north of the Medicine Line last summer. Thinking there was not to pester our neighbors or make our Border Patrol nervous with an influx of tourists. I will provide information on these marks, and a couple of GSC TRI's in southern Saskatchewan to anyone that needs it.

 

TillaMurphs, are you protecting the location of the lost and forlorn compass by not doing a recovery? Your photographs are with the DS. Happened on it while snooping around in GSAK - you do have a pile of BPR and State Survey out there.

 

kayakbird

[+_dxd_]

I can certainly understand the hesitation

 

this one isn't particularly old, it's only somewhat historical, but it's the only one of these that I know of that can be logged through Groundspeak. I found it June of 2010, next log is dated Jan 2011. Notice the difference in the pictures of the disc ?

Edited March 2, 2011 by dixiedawn

[+PFF]

I'm glad the question has come up, because I have struggled with the same issue. Sometimes I submit a complete report to NGS but I omit directions or GPS readings in the Geocaching.com report.

 

Other times, I include a remark that the station is not appropriate for recreational recovery, and I give the reason.

 

The third option is rare, but I occasionally write a note instead of a recovery report on Geocaching.com and flatly state, "Forget it".

 

-Paul-

[Bill93]

I would agree with Paul's advice. I would never hesitate to log to NGS. There are very few that they don't give full info on.

 

I've never found one that I was so worried about that I haven't reported it. I have sometimes noted a reason why additional recreational recoveries were not a good idea, like when I bothered a property owner to get access, or when my (theoretically legal) access bothered someone.

 

My brother found one when he was working on the RR that he reported to NGS but not on GC because it required digging that could get a non-employee in lots of trouble. I think that was the right decision.

[AZcachemeister]

I've never hesitated to post full details on both sites.

I figure if I can find it with the information given, anyone else can too.

Probably should have put the 'not suitable for recreational recovery' disclaimer on CG0875 / B 432.

A driven SS rod in a grassy area in front of the Tumacacori National Monument. We told a nearby employee what we were doing, and asked if it was OK. We did mention that it looked as if we would need to dig a small hole in the grassy area...he said 'OK, just put the grass back when you're done'. We used a metal detector to locate the logo cover, and started digging as my partner's son wandered off with the metal detector. The monument director came out and saw the young man using the metal detector, and told him to stop...and then noticed our activity. After some explanation, she accepted our 'story' (all truthful, mind you), and repeated the admonition to put the grass back.

[Bill93]

If that site is under the National Park Service, I'm surprised you got away with just a warning. As I read the rules at many of their sites you are subject to arrest, fine, and confiscation of any metal detector they see in your car even if you aren't using it.

[TillaMurphs]

Thank you all for your responses.

 

TillaMurphs, are you protecting the location of the lost and forlorn compass by not doing a recovery? Your photographs are with the DS. Happened on it while snooping around in GSAK - you do have a pile of BPR and State Survey out there.

 

I loved finding that compass. I was not trying to protect the location. That find happened before we felt we were ready to start submitting to the NGS. Most of our submissions are geocaching only.

 

 

I can certainly understand the hesitation

 

this one isn't particularly old, it's only somewhat historical, but it's the only one of these that I know of that can be logged through Groundspeak. I found it June of 2010, next log is dated Jan 2011. Notice the difference in the pictures of the disc ?

 

That is exactly what I worry about.

 

 

I'm glad the question has come up, because I have struggled with the same issue. Sometimes I submit a complete report to NGS but I omit directions or GPS readings in the Geocaching.com report.

...

-Paul-

My thoughts pretty much echo yours.

 

 

I figure if I can find it with the information given, anyone else can too.

 

I agree and disagree with you. I agree that the TillaMurphs are nothing special and certainly if we can find a mark then anyone else could also find that mark. BUT, there is a caveat: sometimes we spend many, many hours doing background research and making multiple trips to achieve a recovery. No one else in their right minds would spend days of research and travel just to find a single obscure piece of brass. However, if we find it and post detailed instructions on where it is and how to get there, it now enables someone else to recover it easily and quickly. We have done the homework so our previously mentioned nefarious evildoers can now make a quick snatch and grab if they are so inclined - whereas, if they had to do background work, the mark would likely get ignored.

 

OK. I am rambling. This is just a thought that comes up from time to time. Being a party to the destruction of an irreplaceable piece history is a consideration.

 

I love all you guys – thanks for your replies!

[AZcachemeister]

OK, just wondering if anyone has actually seen any such case where they might suspect benchmark hunters recoveries are being vandalized?

 

e.g.:

Diligent banchmark hunter finds hard-to-locate mark, and gives accurate co-ordinates as well as explicit instructions on how to reach said mark.

 

Miscreant/vandal reads recovery note and removes disk.

 

Second (legitimate) benchmark hunter also reads recovery note, only to find disk has been removed.

[TillaMurphs]

OK, just wondering if anyone has actually seen any such case where they might suspect benchmark hunters recoveries are being vandalized?

 

How about this one: OA0975

[2oldfarts (the rockhounders)]

OK, just wondering if anyone has actually seen any such case where they might suspect benchmark hunters recoveries are being vandalized?

 

How about this one: OA0975

 

From 1942? Long before Geocaching.

 

John

[+Harry Dolphin]

KV1608

 

We found it 1/1/06. holograph went looking for it 11/23/07, but it was gone.

[+zionzr2]

The only one I have hesitated posting was the one I was a FTL (First-To-Log). I was only hesitant b/c I there were no other logs for that very plain and easy to see out in the open mark. AW1017 - C 1214