Jump to content

Archival of E.T. Highway Series


knowschad
Followers 11

Recommended Posts

Apparently NDOT and the Highway Patrol have no safety issues with the running of a marathon at Midnight along the ET Highway on August 13th.

 

Are you suggesting that if they are ok with a marathon, they should be ok with a power trail? Apples and oranges. Actually, further apart than that... more like apples and blowfish.

 

I'd be willing to wager my Garmin that the marathon organizers are required to pay for a hefty police presence for traffic control over the entire route, during the entire time that the event is taking place.

Like some I just like to hear myself speak, but you can interpret whatever you wish! Im sure if someone is hit by a car during the race NDOT and the highway patrol will shut it down too. But whether you're geocaching ET highway or running it there are definitely safety issues to contend with. Most of us follow common sense rules regarding safety others dont. It only takes one, two, or a few that don't to ruin it for all.

Apparently you've never actually seen a marathon. No point in arguing with you about it, then.

Link to comment

I think you need to replace your sarcasm detector.

Depending on who is "talking", the writing of letters and signing of petitions does not fall into the realm of "sarcasm". (I like sarcasm, and have been accused on occasion of using it.)

 

I wanted to eventually go to this series, I had dreams of finding 1k caches in a day only doing half and throwing down film cans. Thanks to Nevada transportation my dreams are crushed. They will get a VERY ANGRY LETTER in the mail!!!!!!!!!angry-smiley-030.gifangry-smiley-030.gifangry-smiley-030.gifangry-smiley-030.gifangry-smiley-030.gif

Probably a very bad idea.

It will be well-written and I will use facts to back up my argument, rest assured it will be as civil as I can make it while still trying to say that I want something to change.

It will not change anything. The series is archived, it will remain archived, it will not be resurrected. I fail to see how a letter to NDOT will change anything other than their opinion of geocachers in a negative direction.

 

Sign the Petition show Your Support!

 

Show your Support for the Sport! Sign DougShep's Petition to Bring Back the ET Run.

 

-ygo2slow

Team Low Tech - 936

http://web.me.com/ygo2slow

"Cache the Planet"

http://apps.facebook.com/petitions/18/restore-the-et-hwy-geocache-series/

Link to comment

I suppose sign like this will be springing up soon.....

 

9118636b-ba90-4682-b2f1-db1d99ca1872.jpg

But they aren't really "parking" they're just stopping long enough to throw a film can out the window and pick up the one the last group left. :rolleyes:

I once received a ticket for parking beside a fire hydrant. At the time I was sitting in the car, the car was sitting in a parking lot, (Hydrant was between street and parking lot) and the motor was running as I talked to my Uncle, who I had seen getting into his car in the lot and pulled in next to him to chat for a minute. So yes they were parking if they stopped at all.

AS for the ET Trail, it was obviously causing problems so I'm glad it was archived, hopefully all others who plan or have placed or hunted PTs can use this series to determine ways of avoiding such problems in the future. Solutions are seldom found overnight but there are many clever cachers out there and I'm confident better ways will be found.

Link to comment

I think you need to replace your sarcasm detector.

Depending on who is "talking", the writing of letters and signing of petitions does not fall into the realm of "sarcasm". (I like sarcasm, and have been accused on occasion of using it.)

 

I wanted to eventually go to this series, I had dreams of finding 1k caches in a day only doing half and throwing down film cans. Thanks to Nevada transportation my dreams are crushed. They will get a VERY ANGRY LETTER in the mail!!!!!!!!!angry-smiley-030.gifangry-smiley-030.gifangry-smiley-030.gifangry-smiley-030.gifangry-smiley-030.gif

 

Read the bolded part again. I don't think he was serious about writing a letter.

Link to comment

I wanted to eventually go to this series, I had dreams of finding 1k caches in a day only doing half and throwing down film cans. Thanks to Nevada transportation my dreams are crushed. They will get a VERY ANGRY LETTER in the mail!!!!!!!!!angry-smiley-030.gifangry-smiley-030.gifangry-smiley-030.gifangry-smiley-030.gifangry-smiley-030.gif

Probably a very bad idea.

It will be well-written and I will use facts to back up my argument, rest assured it will be as civil as I can make it while still trying to say that I want something to change.

You should write that letter to the cachers who caused this mess. The DOT is not at fault here. Pestering them with letter campaigns and petitions is a great way to get the DOT to wash their hands of the headache and just outright ban geocaching wherever they can. This is OUR hobby and they won't care if we can't play it in their sandbox.

OK.

 

Anybody know which geocacher almost got creamed by a snowplow and caused this mess? I need his mailing address.

Edited by sbell111
Link to comment

I wanted to eventually go to this series, I had dreams of finding 1k caches in a day only doing half and throwing down film cans. Thanks to Nevada transportation my dreams are crushed. They will get a VERY ANGRY LETTER in the mail!!!!!!!!!angry-smiley-030.gifangry-smiley-030.gifangry-smiley-030.gifangry-smiley-030.gifangry-smiley-030.gif

Probably a very bad idea.

It will be well-written and I will use facts to back up my argument, rest assured it will be as civil as I can make it while still trying to say that I want something to change.

I'm not sure why one would expend energy on a letter ranting about a done deal.

 

The folks who should be involved have been involved. There have been discussions and agreements and concessions made.

 

Angry letters to officials in Nevada won't accomplish anything constructive. Perhaps they might accomplish very negative outcomes, in fact.

 

Groundspeak is dealing with the issues. They are in communication with the proper authorities, through proper channels.

 

Why try to disrupt that process, about something that is pretty much none of your business?

 

I must be the only one that took the letter as sarcasm. <_<

Link to comment

OK.

 

Anybody know which geocacher almost got creamed by a snowplow and caused this mess? I need his mailing address.

It's quite remarkable how, whenever someone mentions obtaining permission from a landowner or land manager, the forum denizens turn into a bunch of fainting goats. And when they get back up, they are apparently all suffering from short-term amnesia.

 

Anybody know which geocacher placed over 1,000 caches without permission and caused this mess? I need their mailing address.

Link to comment

OK.

 

Anybody know which geocacher almost got creamed by a snowplow and caused this mess? I need his mailing address.

It's quite remarkable how, whenever someone mentions obtaining permission from a landowner or land manager, the forum denizens turn into a bunch of fainting goats. And when they get back up, they are apparently all suffering from short-term amnesia.

 

Anybody know which geocacher placed over 1,000 caches without permission and caused this mess? I need their mailing address.

Everything I know about the series comes from the Forum here but I've never seen any that suggested the caches were placed without permission and plenty to suggest NDOT knew about them and was agreeable to them being there until the snowplow incident.

Link to comment

I find it very telling that in previous threads about this power trail the participants went on and on about the "natural beauty" and the "amazing vistas" and "being out in nature with friends" etc as a selling point for the power trail. Now the power trail is gone and there's gnashing of teeth over plane tickets and well-made plans. Did NDOT ask Groundspeak to archive the scenery and the beauty of nature too?

 

:rolleyes:

Link to comment

I find it very telling that in previous threads about this power trail the participants went on and on about the "natural beauty" and the "amazing vistas" and "being out in nature with friends" etc as a selling point for the power trail. Now the power trail is gone and there's gnashing of teeth over plane tickets and well-made plans. Did NDOT ask Groundspeak to archive the scenery and the beauty of nature too?

 

:rolleyes:

 

:laughing:

Link to comment

Everything I know about the series comes from the Forum here but I've never seen any that suggested the caches were placed without permission

From MissJenn's earlier post:

If you would like to impact this situation positively, we suggest that you place caches with the land owner's or the land manager's permission. That is the relevant guideline for this situation. No other.

Now read the rest of the thread, including the parts about how the CO worked with Groundspeak to get it placed (So Groundspeak must have believed permission was obtained) and the posts where they had worked to correct orther issues with NDOT (So NDOT must have known they were there and agreed to let them remain)

Bottom line it was not a permission issue that got it archived but a problem with the cache seekers. Hindsight is 20/20, no need to invent further details. I think it's sad that some folks have to turn everything into a competition instead of enjoying a simple past time. I would never have hunted those and yes I think a little less of those who hunt that way, but that's all my personal beliefs.

Link to comment

I find it very telling that in previous threads about this power trail the participants went on and on about the "natural beauty" and the "amazing vistas" and "being out in nature with friends" etc as a selling point for the power trail. Now the power trail is gone and there's gnashing of teeth over plane tickets and well-made plans. Did NDOT ask Groundspeak to archive the scenery and the beauty of nature too?

 

:rolleyes:

As I recall from those threads, the views were in response to the claims of a few that these caches were placed in non-scenic locations. Either way, just because some people metioned that the views are great doesn't mean that people aren't making the trip to find the geocaches. I assume that no one is actually taking the position that geocachers traveling to find geocaches is a bad thing.
Link to comment

Everything I know about the series comes from the Forum here but I've never seen any that suggested the caches were placed without permission

From MissJenn's earlier post:

If you would like to impact this situation positively, we suggest that you place caches with the land owner's or the land manager's permission. That is the relevant guideline for this situation. No other.

Now read the rest of the thread, including the parts about how the CO worked with Groundspeak to get it placed (So Groundspeak must have believed permission was obtained) and the posts where they had worked to correct orther issues with NDOT (So NDOT must have known they were there and agreed to let them remain)

Bottom line it was not a permission issue that got it archived but a problem with the cache seekers. Hindsight is 20/20, no need to invent further details. I think it's sad that some folks have to turn everything into a competition instead of enjoying a simple past time. I would never have hunted those and yes I think a little less of those who hunt that way, but that's all my personal beliefs.

I believe that it was a permission issue in that NDOT rescinded permission for the series after the snowplow incident. It was reported that NDOT was previously contacted by the cache owner and only had a problem with a relatively few caches, which the cache owner had agreed to move.

 

A land manager who acknowledges that caches exist on his/her managed property and is OK with it has given his/her approval.

Link to comment

Bottom line it was not a permission issue that got it archived but a problem with the cache seekers.

Are you suggesting MissJenn was lying? Over the years, there have been a select few voices on these forums who I have learned to trust utterly. MissJenn is one of those voices. If she says the caches were archived because of permission issues, I'm going to believe her. My untested theory? I suspect that the series owner(s) believed that, since the caches were placed on a road right of way, a place where many folks think it's OK to be, that they already had adequate permission for the hides, and checked the appropriate box on the cache submission form. The Reviewer, seeing this was checked, had no cause to question it, and published the caches. Every thing was fine right up to the point that NDOT entered the fray, stating their concerns about the series. At that point, Groundspeak decided that, at least for this series, adequate equaled explicit.

 

Now my question is, has this series set a precedent?

 

Will the Reviewers be directed to check for explicit permission on any other roadside caches?

Link to comment

Does anyone else chuckle when they read 'snowplow' and 'Nevada' in the same sentence?

:ph34r:

It snows in every state, even Hawaii and Florida. Why would it be so funny that it snows in Nevada? :huh:

 

A few weeks ago I saw a weather report that indicated that on that day there was currently snow on the ground in 49 of the 50 US States. Florida was only exception. Mauna Kea, on the big island of Hawaii has an elevation of 13,796 feet so it's not too surprising that it gets some snow.

Yeah, but Hawaii has nothing on the 14ers here. ;)

 

How do your beaches compare to those in Hawaii? ;-)

Link to comment

I believe that it was a permission issue in that NDOT rescinded permission for the series after the snowplow incident. It was reported that NDOT was previously contacted by the cache owner and only had a problem with a relatively few caches, which the cache owner had agreed to move.

 

A land manager who acknowledges that caches exist on his/her managed property and is OK with it has given his/her approval.

 

I had assumed when I visited the area that the COs had obtained permission or at least notified the NDOT and local agencies that people were going to be making frequent stops along the roadway. I also wondered about what would happen to many of the caches that were placed very near the road, in the NDOT right of way, and told my wife that it was a good thing we were visiting the area when we did.

 

All I have is the information given in these posts, but I read it differently than you. As far as I can tell, by the time the CO contacted the NDOT (which expressed a problem with certain caches) the trail had long since been established. Around this time, a highway crew removed hundreds of caches within Nye County. There were reports that the sheriff was thinking about ticketing cachers for littering - but the county itself appears to have been otherwise uninformed about the series. There was some hope that the caches could be moved out of the right of way.

 

It also appears that Groundspeak, the CO, and NDOT officials tried to work things out. That there were talks, that everyone was trying to do the right thing, but that the plug was eventually pulled. I have seen nothing to indicate that permission or notification was given before the series was placed - and Miss Jenn's post leads me to believe otherwise. It appears that people were trying to work it out after the fact. Perhaps there are other communications that I am not aware of -- I hope so.

 

Regardless of whether a cacher might feel that there is adequate permission to place a cache or two along the road, the lesson might be that the nature of a megatrail will have significant impact. I still would be surprised that a series of caches of this magnitude would be placed or approved without express knowledge or consent of the relevant agencies -- that Groundspeak and the COs proceeded on a theory of "adequate permission" that was not borne out. So I hope that there is more to the story, but I have not read it if there is.

Edited by mulvaney
Link to comment

Bottom line it was not a permission issue that got it archived but a problem with the cache seekers.

Are you suggesting MissJenn was lying? Over the years, there have been a select few voices on these forums who I have learned to trust utterly. MissJenn is one of those voices. If she says the caches were archived because of permission issues, I'm going to believe her. My untested theory? I suspect that the series owner(s) believed that, since the caches were placed on a road right of way, a place where many folks think it's OK to be, that they already had adequate permission for the hides, and checked the appropriate box on the cache submission form. The Reviewer, seeing this was checked, had no cause to question it, and published the caches. Every thing was fine right up to the point that NDOT entered the fray, stating their concerns about the series. At that point, Groundspeak decided that, at least for this series, adequate equaled explicit.

 

Now my question is, has this series set a precedent?

 

Will the Reviewers be directed to check for explicit permission on any other roadside caches?

I see the problem you are not comprehending what you read.Of course Miss Jenn is truthful, that is a very dumb statement to make. But she is not saying the caches were archived because they were placed without permission, she is stressing to Future hiders to make sure they get permission. I only became a permission issue here when NDOT revoked permission and demanded them pulled. If I invite you into my house and you enter you've done nothing wrong. If you upset me and I then demand you leave it does not mean you entered without permission, it only means I have revoked it at this time.

Link to comment

I see the problem you are not comprehending what you read.Of course Miss Jenn is truthful, that is a very dumb statement to make. But she is not saying the caches were archived because they were placed without permission, she is stressing to Future hiders to make sure they get permission. I only became a permission issue here when NDOT revoked permission and demanded them pulled. If I invite you into my house and you enter you've done nothing wrong. If you upset me and I then demand you leave it does not mean you entered without permission, it only means I have revoked it at this time.

 

I think we are comprehending what we read, although we read it differently than you.

 

If you would like to impact this situation positively, we suggest that you place caches with the land owner's or the land manager's permission. That is the relevant guideline for this situation. No other.

 

Obtain the landowner's and/or land manager's permission before you hide any geocache, whether placed on private or public property.

 

As I read this, she is discussing "this situation" and why a petition to reinstate the caches will not be effective. She quotes the relevant guideline for the actions taken in regard to this series - which require permission before a cache is hidden. She does not say that when permission had been revoked, the cache must be archived. She cites the need to obtain permission in the initial instance.

 

I assume that Miss Jenn can clarify what she meant if she believes it is necessary. I do not want to speculate beyond what she has stated -- although I would be delighted if it were otherwise.

Edited by mulvaney
Link to comment

To reach the conclusion that I think Miss Jenn is lying proves he does not comprehend, and I found the statement very insulting. I may be right or I may be wrong but I'd appreciate a little more respect from a poster I've long liked on here. Disagreeing with his interpretation of her statement does not mean what he assumed and he should know me good enough by now to know it.

Link to comment

Maybe this has already been said and I missed it:

 

Some seem to think these trails have merit and some don't. I wonder if it were made an incredibly long 1000+ stage multi, would it have caused the same problem? Certainly the numbers hounds wouldn't have been there, even though it would have been almost exactly the same experience.

There would have been some bragging rights to say that you've done the longest multi and some who would have tried to set a speed record but leapfrogging and container swapping would have been right out the window (no pun intended)

 

Just a thought.

 

(BTW, I'm not challenging anyone to actually create a 1000 stage multi on a road shoulder somewhere. I have a feeling it would have similar fallout.)

Link to comment

Well I find this thread to be some most interesting reading. It appears that most posters on the thread have no first had information on the E.T. Trail and the surrounding area. Now on the other hand myself and two other cachers completed the trail in October 2010. So as some would say, "Been there did that". So with some personal knowledge of the trail and the area, and most importantly the local residents. Here's my take on what the complaint was about.

 

When driving down a two lane highway and stopping you have to use some common sense. Since I was the appointed driver in our team I'll explain further. You have to realize this is a desolate Nevada highway with fairly light traffic at "times". I would keep constant watch on the horizon in front and behind us at all times. I was fully aware of when a vehicle appeared on the horizon. I got pretty good at calculating when that vehicle would arrive at our location.

 

There are areas along the route such as where the caches first came into discussion where the snow plow incident occurred. That were very dangerous. There is a real windy narrow up and down area. Very difficult for approaching trucks to make any adjustment to miss you if you are parked on or close to the highway. But common sense should come into play here for us geocachers. Park your vehicle completely off of the road. I did. There were several near misses when we we there. Not us, other cachers/vehicles. The owners of the A'lien Inn in Racheal Nevada, operate a large truck on the highway each day. One day to keep from killing some cachers, the driver had to flat spot a new set of tires on the truck to avoid an accident. He wasn't happy about the geocachers that day. Also one of the local EMT's works at the A'lein Inn and she told us plenty of stories about close calls and wrecks caused by the cachers. To say they were less then impressed why we were there, would be an under statement.

 

But they weren't mad at the geocachers for playing their game. They were made at the idiots that didn't use any common sense in where they parked. And not paying attention to when and what they were pulling out in front of. We saw many police officers go by while we were doing the trail. One Nevada State Police officer actually stopped and ask if we were okay. When I explained, "Yes we were just geocahing". He said,"Okay have fun" and continued on down the highway.

 

There is a difference in how you handle the situation of parking along the road. Common sense plays deeply into being safe. If the highway was clear to the horizon in both directions, I would just stop on the edge of the lane/road. And idle while my partners ran for the cache and signed the logs. All the while I was watching the horizon for another vehicle. If a vehicle was approaching I would pull completely off of the road so they could pass completely free of any danger of an accident. It's so easy to be curtious.

 

The ill feelings along the trail were caused by "people" not necessarily all geocachers doing stupid things along the highway. The police officers and highway workers we spoke with were happy and pleased with us and the way were doing things along the road. So responsible geocachers didn't cause the problems along the E.T. Trail. The cachers that made the tremendous effort to build the trail for others to enjoy, should be commended. It's a shame those of you that didn't get to do the trail missed out. We took many pictures along the route as the scenery is wonderful. Sorry to see such a fun thing end the way it has. But don't be to critical of something you know nothing about unless you have been there and talked to the people personally.

 

Just my opinion. Not trying to flame anyone.

Link to comment

Does anyone else chuckle when they read 'snowplow' and 'Nevada' in the same sentence?

:ph34r:

It snows in every state, even Hawaii and Florida. Why would it be so funny that it snows in Nevada? :huh:

 

A few weeks ago I saw a weather report that indicated that on that day there was currently snow on the ground in 49 of the 50 US States. Florida was only exception. Mauna Kea, on the big island of Hawaii has an elevation of 13,796 feet so it's not too surprising that it gets some snow.

Yeah, but Hawaii has nothing on the 14ers here. ;)

 

How do your beaches compare to those in Hawaii? ;-)

Quite nice, actually.

 

GreatSandDunesBeach.jpg

Link to comment

The ill feelings along the trail were caused by "people" not necessarily all geocachers doing stupid things along the highway.

 

The owners of the A'lien Inn in Racheal Nevada, operate a large truck on the highway each day. One day to keep from killing some cachers, the driver had to flat spot a new set of tires on the truck to avoid an accident. He wasn't happy about the geocachers that day. Also one of the local EMT's works at the A'lein Inn and she told us plenty of stories about close calls and wrecks caused by the cachers. To say they were less then impressed why we were there, would be an under statement.

 

Sounds like some of the problems were caused by cachers doing that run. I mean, I wasn't there so my opinion is barely worth a pile of rocks :rolleyes:, but coming from somebody that was there it sure looks that way. I'm sure it wasn't all the cachers that found caches along that trail but apparently enough that NDOT felt it necessary to call for it's archival.

Link to comment

Thanks, n7viv and DB, for a first hand response. I have a number of friends who have already gone and I have tickets & reservations to head out there in about a month. I'm so glad that you posted your explanation though. Despite that I have a number of friends who have talked to me about it, if I try to post it's just heresy. The fact that you have personally visited lends a credibility to it that I couldn't do.

 

I think the reason so few people post who have actually gone is because they've "been there and done that" and don't feel a need to now explain (or even justify) their reasons for going.

 

Again, thanks so much for posting your stories :)

 

I sincerely wish that the "problem children" (term used very loosely) - whether they be cachers or noncachers - had been ticketed and fined. Maybe if the stories had carried over that you better behave this particular way, then people - cachers or noncachers - would conduct themselves in a proper fashion.

Link to comment

This latest move chaps me a bit. If a few idiot cachers cant figure out how to merge on a single lane highway, they shouldnt be behind the wheel. Stick to riding a bike or take public transit.

 

How is the ET series any different from your garden variety guardrail-style cache? I will answer: Nothing other than theres a lot more of them. Theres thousands of those guardrail-style caches throughout this country. Heck, I know of a small cache series in the Tacoma area thats off a fairly busy two-lane road that winds up a hillside with twist and turns and just so happens to have a short caches series along it that is a guardrail series. I havent heard of WashDot complaining about that series. Heres something else the brainiacs at NDOT can think about; Did they considered the additional tourism dollars coming in from cachers who are visiting the middle-of-stinking-no-where, Nevada to grab these caches? These cachers are spending money and paying taxes to buy gas, food and lodging in an area of the state thats far away from the bright lights and big tourism dollars of Vegas? Apparently not. I guess too much sun not only causes skin cancer but apparently also kills off brain cells. WAY TO GO SILVER STATE!

 

I'm agnostic about the trail, but cachers are spending -- what -- a couple hundred bucks each doing this trail? One lawsuit would completely destroy any potential monetary gain from the tourism boost. Also, 'middle-of-stinking-no-where' is no way to talk about your host. And that's what all these people are who allow our cachers to be there are -- our hosts. Let's treat them as such. If you know Nevadans, they'd probably rather you keep your money in your pocket if you are going to talk about their state like that.

Link to comment

Thanks, n7viv and DB, for a first hand response. I have a number of friends who have already gone and I have tickets & reservations to head out there in about a month. I'm so glad that you posted your explanation though. Despite that I have a number of friends who have talked to me about it, if I try to post it's just heresy. The fact that you have personally visited lends a credibility to it that I couldn't do.

 

I think the reason so few people post who have actually gone is because they've "been there and done that" and don't feel a need to now explain (or even justify) their reasons for going.

 

Again, thanks so much for posting your stories :)

 

I sincerely wish that the "problem children" (term used very loosely) - whether they be cachers or noncachers - had been ticketed and fined. Maybe if the stories had carried over that you better behave this particular way, then people - cachers or noncachers - would conduct themselves in a proper fashion.

 

I just didn't feel it was fair to blame cachers as a whole. Or the Nevada Highway officials for the need to archive the series. Most of the highway where the caches were located is long and fairly straight and you can see for 4 or 5 miles either direction. Most of the hazardous area is in one spot where the very tight twist and elevation changes were located.

 

The other major problem was people not thinking about traffic coming down the road. And how where they were parking affected the flow of that traffic or the safety of others. There were many complaints about people just parking right on the road, blocking one lane of traffic. We paid special attention not to do this. And when the Sheriffs and Highway Patrol officers came by us they just waved and smiled. Because they could see we were making an effort to not block traffic, or slow it down.

 

But the one geographic area where the snow plow incident occurred, is no ones fault. It's just not a good place to stop for any reason. Even if you had to change a tire through there. You'd be taking your life in your hands.

 

For the most part the local residents are friendly and helpful.

 

I don't think anyone is to blame. It's just circumstances that build up over time. Just smile and go geocaching. It's over and done with. It was fun while it lasted.

Link to comment

The blame is on the powertrail itself and those that created it, approved it and a large majority that did the trail. How is the geographical area no ones fault. How about, use common sense and not put caches there. It was not hard to figure out BEFORE hand, that this type of caching (used loosely) causes problems, they don't just build up over time, they are built in.

Link to comment

The blame is on the powertrail itself and those that created it, approved it and a large majority that did the trail. How is the geographical area no ones fault. How about, use common sense and not put caches there. It was not hard to figure out BEFORE hand, that this type of caching (used loosely) causes problems, they don't just build up over time, they are built in.

When I earlier suggested Groundspeak might want to be more proactive about rejecting dangerous power trail locations, I didn't get much support for that idea.

 

Similarly, if the road has narrow shoulders and winding curves, it might be unwise to develop a power trail there. For standard caches, people usually are willing to safely park at a roadside turnout and walk 100 yards to the cache. For power caches, not so much.

Most power trail cachers will behave well when they do their runs, but it's obvious that some will minimize their times with actions that place themselves and others at risk.

 

I hope Groundspeak recognizes there are differences between standard caches and power trail caches and takes that into account when they review submissions.

Link to comment

The blame is on the powertrail itself and those that created it, approved it and a large majority that did the trail. How is the geographical area no ones fault. How about, use common sense and not put caches there. It was not hard to figure out BEFORE hand, that this type of caching (used loosely) causes problems, they don't just build up over time, they are built in.

Simply blaming power trails is way too easy and an oversimplification. Any cache can cause a problem. Ammo cans hidden in the woods have provoked bomb scares. There have be people hurt hunting caches not anywhere near roads. Cachers have parked in unsafe places and have done illegal things to retrieve a single cache.

 

The reviewers do their best to ensure that caches are placed according to the guidelines and many even express concerns if the feel a cache could cause other problems. But it is not possible to foresee every problem. Hindsight is 20/20. Most cache owners are also responsible and try to anticipate problems and avoid placing caches that would cause issues. They also will archive caches or make adjustments when they are informed that there are problems. It appears the cache owner was trying to make adjustments to some of the caches when NDOT decided to ask for the entire trail to be archived.

 

I believe the owners and the reviewers for this trail simply did not anticipate some of the problems that occurred. The road runs through BLM land and the BLM was okay with the caches. Since it is open range most of the way and cattle grazing on the BLM land wander right onto the highway, one can see why they might not have thought about checking with NDOT before placing the caches. Certainly there are sections where the road goes through mountain passes and is not straight with miles of visibility in each direction. Thinking about that now, one could probably have anticipated that putting a cache every .1 miles might result is some being in places where it wasn't safe to stop. In that respect you might blame the idea of a power trail for causing problems, though future power trails now will not insist on place a cache every 528 ft. and will spread them out more to account for conditions like this.

 

The whole exercise was a learning experience for those that hide power trails as well as those that find them. It may result in some guidelines changes or at least in reviewers asking a few more questions when these trails are submitted. But even without guidelines changes, future power trails will likely be a little different that this one was.

 

I suspect that those who don't like power trails at all, are hoping for a guideline change that would ban them. If only they could define what a power trail is. There doesn't seem to be much from this one example that could be used to argue that the power trail itself is to blame. However, I think there are two points about mega power trails like this one that may need to be addressed. First is the popularity of these trails. The increase traffic caused because so many geocachers want to hunt them, need to be considered. Most "bad" caches fly under the radar. They get so few visitors that the odds of a bureaucrat deciding that the cache is causing a problem is small. Second, and I'm not as certain about this, are the few speed cachers who decide that the fun in doing these trails is to do them fast and in doing so they ignore common sense and safety in moving from cache to cache. It seems that this may have been a contributing factor here.

Link to comment

The blame is on the powertrail itself and those that created it, approved it and a large majority that did the trail. How is the geographical area no ones fault. How about, use common sense and not put caches there. It was not hard to figure out BEFORE hand, that this type of caching (used loosely) causes problems, they don't just build up over time, they are built in.

Simply blaming power trails is way too easy and an oversimplification. Any cache can cause a problem. Ammo cans hidden in the woods have provoked bomb scares. There have be people hurt hunting caches not anywhere near roads. Cachers have parked in unsafe places and have done illegal things to retrieve a single cache.

 

The reviewers do their best to ensure that caches are placed according to the guidelines and many even express concerns if the feel a cache could cause other problems. But it is not possible to foresee every problem. Hindsight is 20/20. Most cache owners are also responsible and try to anticipate problems and avoid placing caches that would cause issues. They also will archive caches or make adjustments when they are informed that there are problems. It appears the cache owner was trying to make adjustments to some of the caches when NDOT decided to ask for the entire trail to be archived.

 

I believe the owners and the reviewers for this trail simply did not anticipate some of the problems that occurred. The road runs through BLM land and the BLM was okay with the caches. Since it is open range most of the way and cattle grazing on the BLM land wander right onto the highway, one can see why they might not have thought about checking with NDOT before placing the caches. Certainly there are sections where the road goes through mountain passes and is not straight with miles of visibility in each direction. Thinking about that now, one could probably have anticipated that putting a cache every .1 miles might result is some being in places where it wasn't safe to stop. In that respect you might blame the idea of a power trail for causing problems, though future power trails now will not insist on place a cache every 528 ft. and will spread them out more to account for conditions like this.

 

The whole exercise was a learning experience for those that hide power trails as well as those that find them. It may result in some guidelines changes or at least in reviewers asking a few more questions when these trails are submitted. But even without guidelines changes, future power trails will likely be a little different that this one was.

 

I suspect that those who don't like power trails at all, are hoping for a guideline change that would ban them. If only they could define what a power trail is. There doesn't seem to be much from this one example that could be used to argue that the power trail itself is to blame. However, I think there are two points about mega power trails like this one that may need to be addressed. First is the popularity of these trails. The increase traffic caused because so many geocachers want to hunt them, need to be considered. Most "bad" caches fly under the radar. They get so few visitors that the odds of a bureaucrat deciding that the cache is causing a problem is small. Second, and I'm not as certain about this, are the few speed cachers who decide that the fun in doing these trails is to do them fast and in doing so they ignore common sense and safety in moving from cache to cache. It seems that this may have been a contributing factor here.

 

Foresight was 20/20 for many, most of the things you mention where shouted down by you and other pro-power trail cachers months ago, and were told we were alarmists. Not sure how you can come back now and present this as hindsight. Silly.

Link to comment
snip...

 

Yes, hindsight is 20/20 and some caches do cause problems. Do you think they would react any other way?

 

And by the way, nobody wants their cattle on the road. You can end up with loss of life, loss of livelihood, and a lawsuit. Most farmers aren't that negligent.

 

 

edit: missing an s

Edited by BlueDeuce
Link to comment
snip...

 

And by the way, nobody wants their cattle on the road. You can end up with loss of life, loss of livelihood, and a lawsuit. Most farmers aren't that negligent.

 

 

edit: missing an s

It's called open range, fairly common in the west

 

Sorry, that was a side point and not the main part of my response.

Link to comment

To reach the conclusion that I think Miss Jenn is lying proves he does not comprehend

I didn't reach that conclusion. I asked the question because I was trying to understand your seemingly contradictory statements. At that stage in the conversation, we, (the collective), were discussing why, specifically, the series was archived by Groundspeak. I have no doubt there were many factors which led to Groundspeak reviewing the viability of this series, however, according to Groundspeak, the reason they were archived was a permission issue. MissJenn made that abundantly clear, yet you continued to insist that the information she provided was not correct.

 

At this point, I think I will simply agree to disagree, rather than further argue a point you feel strongly about.

Link to comment
But the one geographic area where the snow plow incident occurred, is no ones fault. It's just not a good place to stop for any reason.

If it's not a good place to stop for ANY reason, then it's the cache owners fault for placing it there.

 

The other major problem was people not thinking about traffic coming down the road. And how where they were parking affected the flow of that traffic or the safety of others. There were many complaints about people just parking right on the road, blocking one lane of traffic. We paid special attention not to do this. And when the Sheriffs and Highway Patrol officers came by us they just waved and smiled. Because they could see we were making an effort to not block traffic, or slow it down.

 

This is something I just don't understand. If I were driving down the highway and had a flat tire, I certainly wouldn't feel that I could just park my car in the lane of traffic and change the tire. How anyone could justify doing this just because they're geocaching is beyond me. Geocaching does not absolve you from following traffic laws. I don't want to hear the "it's a sparsely traveled road" argument, either. If there are "many complaints" about this practice, then the highway isn't as lightly traveled as some are making it out to be.

Link to comment
The road runs through BLM land and the BLM was okay with the caches.

I don't know why people keep saying things like this. If the caches were placed in the right of way, it is irrelevant who owned the land. It could have been your land. It could have been my land. It does not matter because the NDOT controls what can and cannot be done in the right of way. Besides, wasn't the Trail of the Gods also on BLM land? Where'd it go?

 

A few caches placed here and there along a highway are not going to draw much, if any notice. Place over 1,000 in a row and the consequences are not only foreseeable, but predictable. A bunch of strangers showing up and exhibiting less sense than a typical herd of cows is unfortunate, but also predictable.

 

People argue in these forums all day long about the guidelines, but the guidelines are really intended to allow Groundspeak to publicly list caches without also assuming the liability for those same caches. From time to time, some other stuff creeps in because the moderators and reviewers (the "volunteer administrators") grow tired of having to mediate squabbles over silly things like ALRs, but mostly Groundspeak has has been very careful to shield themselves. They merely "list" caches. They do not "approve" new caches. New caches are "published". Not by Groundspeak employees, but by unpaid volunteers. When a cache gets archived, it is really just unpublished. It is left up the cache owner to actually remove an archived cache. There is nothing stopping the owner of the E.T. Highway series from re-listing the entire series on some other site or even setting up their own site. (filmcans.com is taken by the way).

 

When a cache is submitted, the cache owner checks two boxes. One indicates that they have read and agree to the guidelines for listing a cache and another indicates that they agree to the terms of use. The cache owner has just submitted that they have permission to place a cache in the described location and they probably should have actually read section 11 of the terms of use instead of just indicating that they agree with those terms. Groundspeak wisely accepts the cache owner's word and the cache is quickly published (usually).

 

Are lessons learned going to be applied next time? Maybe. This is the second big short-lived power trail, so it may lead to some adjustments, mostly for marketing reasons. But don't expect people to stop arguing about the merits pro and con. And don't expect people stop imagining permissions where there are none.

 

Before anyone accuses me of being a power trail hater, let me say that I think power trails are not going to have a positive outcome, but I also think they are inevitable. This is America. No matter what someone is doing, somebody figures out how to bolt a motor onto it. Someone else sees what they've done and tries to make a faster one. And so it goes.

Link to comment

Before anyone accuses me of being a power trail hater, let me say that I think power trails are not going to have a positive outcome, but I also think they are inevitable. This is America.

 

This trail was in America, but Groundspeak and geocaching are an international phenomenom, and any guidelines and changes in policy will apply across the board - World wide - and not just in this locality.:)

Link to comment

Well I find this thread to be some most interesting reading. It appears that most posters on the thread have no first had information on the E.T. Trail and the surrounding area. Now on the other hand myself and two other cachers completed the trail in October 2010. So as some would say, "Been there did that". So with some personal knowledge of the trail and the area, and most importantly the local residents. Here's my take on what the complaint was about.

 

When driving down a two lane highway and stopping you have to use some common sense. Since I was the appointed driver in our team I'll explain further. You have to realize this is a desolate Nevada highway with fairly light traffic at "times". I would keep constant watch on the horizon in front and behind us at all times. I was fully aware of when a vehicle appeared on the horizon. I got pretty good at calculating when that vehicle would arrive at our location.

 

There are areas along the route such as where the caches first came into discussion where the snow plow incident occurred. That were very dangerous. There is a real windy narrow up and down area. Very difficult for approaching trucks to make any adjustment to miss you if you are parked on or close to the highway. But common sense should come into play here for us geocachers. Park your vehicle completely off of the road. I did. There were several near misses when we we there. Not us, other cachers/vehicles. The owners of the A'lien Inn in Racheal Nevada, operate a large truck on the highway each day. One day to keep from killing some cachers, the driver had to flat spot a new set of tires on the truck to avoid an accident. He wasn't happy about the geocachers that day. Also one of the local EMT's works at the A'lein Inn and she told us plenty of stories about close calls and wrecks caused by the cachers. To say they were less then impressed why we were there, would be an under statement.

 

But they weren't mad at the geocachers for playing their game. They were made at the idiots that didn't use any common sense in where they parked. And not paying attention to when and what they were pulling out in front of. We saw many police officers go by while we were doing the trail. One Nevada State Police officer actually stopped and ask if we were okay. When I explained, "Yes we were just geocahing". He said,"Okay have fun" and continued on down the highway.

 

There is a difference in how you handle the situation of parking along the road. Common sense plays deeply into being safe. If the highway was clear to the horizon in both directions, I would just stop on the edge of the lane/road. And idle while my partners ran for the cache and signed the logs. All the while I was watching the horizon for another vehicle. If a vehicle was approaching I would pull completely off of the road so they could pass completely free of any danger of an accident. It's so easy to be curtious.

 

The ill feelings along the trail were caused by "people" not necessarily all geocachers doing stupid things along the highway. The police officers and highway workers we spoke with were happy and pleased with us and the way were doing things along the road. So responsible geocachers didn't cause the problems along the E.T. Trail. The cachers that made the tremendous effort to build the trail for others to enjoy, should be commended. It's a shame those of you that didn't get to do the trail missed out. We took many pictures along the route as the scenery is wonderful. Sorry to see such a fun thing end the way it has. But don't be to critical of something you know nothing about unless you have been there and talked to the people personally.

 

Just my opinion. Not trying to flame anyone.

 

FYI - this is a direct quote from an email this person sent out about his ET trip - guess his memory isn't as good as it was when he was braggin it up!!!

 

"And then we could see some other cachers out on the horizon, about five miles in front of us. They actually came by us on the ET HWY logging caches while we were doing the head. We started to pour the coals on. I was almost smoking the tires accelerating from cache to cache. As soon as the guys got in I would push the throttle full open from 528 to 250 feet to the next cache. Then I was power braking from 250 feet to zero feet at the cache. The guys would jump out on a dead run. as soon as they were aboard again, I had the throttle full open repeating the story above. We reeled the other team of cachers in about ten miles of hard caching as described above. We actually had smoking brakes. But by God we caught up with them. When they saw us coming they started running back and forth to their Jeep. We just laughed and poured on the coals even more. We got right up on their rear bumper. We could of passed them, but xxxxxx said let's just stay behind them and keep the pressure on. They lasted about two more miles and then they called it a day. One of those guys was xxx from xxxxxxx. We sure had some good laughs over that one. I'll bet they never forget the day we ran their asses ragged. They were looking pretty worried there at the end. It felt real good to reel them in from way out on the horizon as just a little black dot far off in the distance."

 

Seriously - this is exactly what N7VIV and DB sent out in an email blast to numerous people!

Edited by rebasport
Link to comment
Wow, just got the news. Was going to do this run this summer while in Vegas on a business trip, along with my 16-year old son and another friend. Was looking forward to the time together. Was also going to contribute to the local economy by staying in a nearby hotel before and after the run, buying gas and food locally, etc. I'm more into "interesting" caches than running up my numbers, but I thought this would be fun to do. Oh well, less time I have to take off work this summer, I guess.
Then you might consider Red Rock Canyon, The Valley of Fire, the Toroweap Overlook (and the One Giant Step virtual), looping through Zion, Bryce, and the North Rim, the Mt Charleston area, or a side trip to Death Valley (a little hot in the summer but it still can be enjoyed). There are old ghost towns, amazing formations, remnants of the Old Spanish Trail, and things that would give a 16 year old far more important memories than film cans by the road - but there are also lots of caches with any of these options.
Could you attach some GC #'s to those areas, sure would like to take a look at them.
A few years back, I made a bookmark for caches I wanted to go after while out in the area described by mulvaney. I went into the regional forums, asked for advice on "must do caches" did a bit of browsing around on the maps, and ended up with this. We didn't get a chance to do all of them, but wow, I'd do this list again before I'd do that monotonous ET Run.

 

If NDOT can't train snowplow drivers to not hit parked vehicles, then they should ban geocaching. Makes perfectly logical sense to me.
I have yet to find any area that has good drivers on their snowplows. Those things are dangerous!
In most states (if not all) a snowplow is considered an Emergency Vehicle. I'd imagine that those same states have laws requiring drivers to get out of the way of Emergency Vehicles, not to mention the prohibitions on parking on controlled highways and/or during snow removal times.

 

Snowplows aren't anywhere near as dangerous as nincompoops who get in the way of them trying to make the roads safe for the rest of us. Living in Northern New England all my life, I've never heard of a snowplow driver that CAUSED an accident, only drivers who did stupid things around a snowplow.

Link to comment

 

FYI - this is a direct quote from an email this person sent out about his ET trip - guess his memory isn't as good as it was when he was braggin it up!!!

 

"And then we could see some other cachers out on the horizon, about five miles in front of us. They actually came by us on the ET HWY logging caches while we were doing the head. We started to pour the coals on. I was almost smoking the tires accelerating from cache to cache. As soon as the guys got in I would push the throttle full open from 528 to 250 feet to the next cache. Then I was power braking from 250 feet to zero feet at the cache. The guys would jump out on a dead run. as soon as they were aboard again, I had the throttle full open repeating the story above. We reeled the other team of cachers in about ten miles of hard caching as described above. We actually had smoking brakes. But by God we caught up with them. When they saw us coming they started running back and forth to their Jeep. We just laughed and poured on the coals even more. We got right up on their rear bumper. We could of passed them, but xxxxxx said let's just stay behind them and keep the pressure on. They lasted about two more miles and then they called it a day. One of those guys was xxx from xxxxxxx. We sure had some good laughs over that one. I'll bet they never forget the day we ran their asses ragged. They were looking pretty worried there at the end. It felt real good to reel them in from way out on the horizon as just a little black dot far off in the distance."

 

Seriously - this is exactly what N7VIV and DB sent out in an email blast to numerous people!

 

I guess Rebasport figures I would deny sending the quoted email above. I won't deny it. I did send it and it's all true. And we were having a blast doing it. But we never held up any traffic or interfered with any.

 

So what's her point? I didn't break any laws. And during the period of time described in the story above. The cachers we were pursuing and us were the only vehicles on the road. So is it bad to enjoy the game with your fellow cachers?

 

Rebasport needs to get a life.

Link to comment

I guess Rebasport figures I would deny sending the quoted email above. I won't deny it. I did send it and it's all true. And we were having a blast doing it. But we never held up any traffic or interfered with any.

 

So what's her point? I didn't break any laws. And during the period of time described in the story above. The cachers we were pursuing and us were the only vehicles on the road. So is it bad to enjoy the game with your fellow cachers?

 

Rebasport needs to get a life.

 

" Why yes Officer, I was going w.o.t. and then slamming on my brakes every 528 feet, stopping directly in the traffic lane, but there wasn't anyone else on the highway, and I stopped doing it when I began riding right on the rear bumper of another vehicle, but they didn't care. You really need to get a life."

 

"mmhmm... sign here please."

Good luck with that !!;)

I'm going to try that one the next time I get stopped for going 85 in a 55." Well there was nobody else around. 'cept you of course, and you were parked off on the shoulder"

 

edit-speelin

Edited by NeecesandNephews
Link to comment
FYI - this is a direct quote from an email this person sent out about his ET trip - guess his memory isn't as good as it was when he was braggin it up!!!

 

"And then we could see some other cachers out on the horizon, about five miles in front of us. They actually came by us on the ET HWY logging caches while we were doing the head. We started to pour the coals on. I was almost smoking the tires accelerating from cache to cache. As soon as the guys got in I would push the throttle full open from 528 to 250 feet to the next cache. Then I was power braking from 250 feet to zero feet at the cache. The guys would jump out on a dead run. as soon as they were aboard again, I had the throttle full open repeating the story above. We reeled the other team of cachers in about ten miles of hard caching as described above. We actually had smoking brakes. But by God we caught up with them. When they saw us coming they started running back and forth to their Jeep. We just laughed and poured on the coals even more. We got right up on their rear bumper. We could of passed them, but xxxxxx said let's just stay behind them and keep the pressure on. They lasted about two more miles and then they called it a day. One of those guys was xxx from xxxxxxx. We sure had some good laughs over that one. I'll bet they never forget the day we ran their @@@es ragged. They were looking pretty worried there at the end. It felt real good to reel them in from way out on the horizon as just a little black dot far off in the distance."

 

Seriously - this is exactly what N7VIV and DB sent out in an email blast to numerous people!

I guess Rebasport figures I would deny sending the quoted email above. I won't deny it. I did send it and it's all true. And we were having a blast doing it. But we never held up any traffic or interfered with any.

 

So what's her point? I didn't break any laws. And during the period of time described in the story above. The cachers we were pursuing and us were the only vehicles on the road. So is it bad to enjoy the game with your fellow cachers?

 

Rebasport needs to get a life.

I believe Rebasport was responding to the difference between your description of irresponsible, and dangerous driving practices with the following:
The ill feelings along the trail were caused by "people" not necessarily all geocachers doing stupid things along the highway. The police officers and highway workers we spoke with were happy and pleased with us and the way were doing things along the road. So responsible geocachers didn't cause the problems along the E.T. Trail.
What you describe as your own actions were in no way the actions of "responsible geocachers." You described "geocachers doing stupid things along the highway."
Link to comment

 

FYI - this is a direct quote from an email this person sent out about his ET trip - guess his memory isn't as good as it was when he was braggin it up!!!

 

"And then we could see some other cachers out on the horizon, about five miles in front of us. They actually came by us on the ET HWY logging caches while we were doing the head. We started to pour the coals on. I was almost smoking the tires accelerating from cache to cache. As soon as the guys got in I would push the throttle full open from 528 to 250 feet to the next cache. Then I was power braking from 250 feet to zero feet at the cache. The guys would jump out on a dead run. as soon as they were aboard again, I had the throttle full open repeating the story above. We reeled the other team of cachers in about ten miles of hard caching as described above. We actually had smoking brakes. But by God we caught up with them. When they saw us coming they started running back and forth to their Jeep. We just laughed and poured on the coals even more. We got right up on their rear bumper. We could of passed them, but xxxxxx said let's just stay behind them and keep the pressure on. They lasted about two more miles and then they called it a day. One of those guys was xxx from xxxxxxx. We sure had some good laughs over that one. I'll bet they never forget the day we ran their asses ragged. They were looking pretty worried there at the end. It felt real good to reel them in from way out on the horizon as just a little black dot far off in the distance."

 

Seriously - this is exactly what N7VIV and DB sent out in an email blast to numerous people!

 

I guess Rebasport figures I would deny sending the quoted email above. I won't deny it. I did send it and it's all true. And we were having a blast doing it. But we never held up any traffic or interfered with any.

 

So what's her point? I didn't break any laws. And during the period of time described in the story above. The cachers we were pursuing and us were the only vehicles on the road. So is it bad to enjoy the game with your fellow cachers?

 

Rebasport needs to get a life.

 

Rebasport has life and it is wonderful! It is your own actions that are deplorable by your own words. Don't attack me for exposing the truth.

Link to comment
FYI - this is a direct quote from an email this person sent out about his ET trip - guess his memory isn't as good as it was when he was braggin it up!!!

 

"And then we could see some other cachers out on the horizon, about five miles in front of us. They actually came by us on the ET HWY logging caches while we were doing the head. We started to pour the coals on. I was almost smoking the tires accelerating from cache to cache. As soon as the guys got in I would push the throttle full open from 528 to 250 feet to the next cache. Then I was power braking from 250 feet to zero feet at the cache. The guys would jump out on a dead run. as soon as they were aboard again, I had the throttle full open repeating the story above. We reeled the other team of cachers in about ten miles of hard caching as described above. We actually had smoking brakes. But by God we caught up with them. When they saw us coming they started running back and forth to their Jeep. We just laughed and poured on the coals even more. We got right up on their rear bumper. We could of passed them, but xxxxxx said let's just stay behind them and keep the pressure on. They lasted about two more miles and then they called it a day. One of those guys was xxx from xxxxxxx. We sure had some good laughs over that one. I'll bet they never forget the day we ran their @@@es ragged. They were looking pretty worried there at the end. It felt real good to reel them in from way out on the horizon as just a little black dot far off in the distance."

 

Seriously - this is exactly what N7VIV and DB sent out in an email blast to numerous people!

I guess Rebasport figures I would deny sending the quoted email above. I won't deny it. I did send it and it's all true. And we were having a blast doing it. But we never held up any traffic or interfered with any.

 

So what's her point? I didn't break any laws. And during the period of time described in the story above. The cachers we were pursuing and us were the only vehicles on the road. So is it bad to enjoy the game with your fellow cachers?

 

Rebasport needs to get a life.

I believe Rebasport was responding to the difference between your description of irresponsible, and dangerous driving practices with the following:
The ill feelings along the trail were caused by "people" not necessarily all geocachers doing stupid things along the highway. The police officers and highway workers we spoke with were happy and pleased with us and the way were doing things along the road. So responsible geocachers didn't cause the problems along the E.T. Trail.
What you describe as your own actions were in no way the actions of "responsible geocachers." You described "geocachers doing stupid things along the highway."

 

Thank you for seeing it that way as well.

Link to comment

 

FYI - this is a direct quote from an email this person sent out about his ET trip - guess his memory isn't as good as it was when he was braggin it up!!!

 

"And then we could see some other cachers out on the horizon, about five miles in front of us. They actually came by us on the ET HWY logging caches while we were doing the head. We started to pour the coals on. I was almost smoking the tires accelerating from cache to cache. As soon as the guys got in I would push the throttle full open from 528 to 250 feet to the next cache. Then I was power braking from 250 feet to zero feet at the cache. The guys would jump out on a dead run. as soon as they were aboard again, I had the throttle full open repeating the story above. We reeled the other team of cachers in about ten miles of hard caching as described above. We actually had smoking brakes. But by God we caught up with them. When they saw us coming they started running back and forth to their Jeep. We just laughed and poured on the coals even more. We got right up on their rear bumper. We could of passed them, but xxxxxx said let's just stay behind them and keep the pressure on. They lasted about two more miles and then they called it a day. One of those guys was xxx from xxxxxxx. We sure had some good laughs over that one. I'll bet they never forget the day we ran their asses ragged. They were looking pretty worried there at the end. It felt real good to reel them in from way out on the horizon as just a little black dot far off in the distance."

 

Seriously - this is exactly what N7VIV and DB sent out in an email blast to numerous people!

 

I guess Rebasport figures I would deny sending the quoted email above. I won't deny it. I did send it and it's all true. And we were having a blast doing it. But we never held up any traffic or interfered with any.

 

So what's her point? I didn't break any laws. And during the period of time described in the story above. The cachers we were pursuing and us were the only vehicles on the road. So is it bad to enjoy the game with your fellow cachers?

 

Rebasport needs to get a life.

 

:lol: :lol: :lol:

 

Your description sounds like your behavior was less than responsible but I wouldn't know. I wasn't there...

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Followers 11
×
×
  • Create New...